Pinkerton’s  National  Detective  Agency 


AND  ITS  CONNECTION  WITH 


THE  LABOR  TROUBLES 

AT 

Homestead,  Penn, 

Jitly  6th , i8g2, 

WITH 


EXTRACTS  FROM  PROOFS  BEFORE  THE 
JUDICIARY  COMMITTEES  OF  THE  U.  S. 
SENATE  AND  HOUSE  OF 
REPRESENTATIVES. 


Pinkerton’s  National  Detective  Agency. 


Founded  by  Allan  Pinkerton,  1850. 


ROBT.  A.  PINKERTON,  NEW  YORK,/ 
WM.  A.  PINKERTON,  CHICAGO,  ' 


Gso.  D.  Bangs, 

Gen’l  Supt. 

NEW  YORK. 


RICHARD  WARD  GREENE  WELLING. 


icago. 

, Denver. 


BOSTON,  42  &.  44  COURT  St., 

NEW  YORK,  66  EXCHANGE  PLACE, 

PH  I LADELPH  I A,  441  CHESTNUT  ST., 
CHICAGO,  199  &.  201  FIFTH  AVE.,  - 
ST.  PAUL,  GERMANIA  BANK  BUILDING, 
KANSAS  CITY,  105  A 107  W.  6TH  ST., 
DENVER,  opera  House  block,  - 
PORTLAND,  ORE.,  WlARQUAM  BLOCK,  - 


JOHN  CORNISH,  Supt. 

W.  J.  LOADER,  Supt. 

E.  S.  GAYLOR,  Supt 
FRANK  MURRAY,  Supt 
C.  M.  WEBER,  Supt. 

C.  H EPPELSHEIMER,  Supt 
JAS.  McPARLAND,  Supt. 

H.  W.  MINSTER,  Supt. 


Attorneys  for  Agency  at  New  York: 


Messrs.  SEWARD,  GUTHRIE  & MORAWETZ. 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2016 


https://archive.org/details/pinkertonsnation01pink 


331.  HX 
7&B5T 


Pinkerton’s  National  Detective  Agency 

AND  ITS  CONNECTION  WITH 

THE  LABOR  TROUBLES 


AT 

Homestead,  Penn. 


In  answer  to  numerous  inquiries  as  to  the  connection 
of  Pinkerton’s  National  Detective  Agency  with  the 
labor  troubles  and  riots  last  July,  at  Homestead, 
Penn.,  we  have  prepared  the  following  pamphlet,  which 
may  be  interesting  to  those  who  desire  to  know  the 
true  facts  in  connection  with  this  matter. 

The  employment  of  watchmen  to  protect  private 
property  is  entirely  distinct  and  separate  from  our  de- 
tective bureau.  This  business’of  watching  and  guard- 
ing private  property  is  extensively  carried  on  in  large 
cities  in  this  country  by  many  reputable  concerns,  and 
thousands  of  banks,  residences,  warehouses,  offices, 
stores,  shipping,  &c.,  are  thus  protected  and  guarded 
by  private  watchmen.  We  submit  this  pamphlet  to 
show  that  our  acts  in  connection  with  strikes  and  labor 
troubles  have  been  entirely  legal,  and  when  calmly  and 
fairly  investigated,  will  be  upheld  by  all  who  recognize 
the  right  of  the  employers,  whether  individuals  or  cor- 
porations, to  protect  their  property  and  the  lives  of 
their  employees. 


2 


Our  Agency  has,  at  all  times,  preferred  not  to  fur- 
nish watchmen  in  strikes  and  riots  ; but  we  have  felt 
that  we  could  not  consistently  refuse  to  do  so  whenever 
the  necessities  of  our  clients  have  required  the  services 
of  our  employees.  It  may  be  that  the  calling  out  of 
the  militia  will  hereafter  prevent  the  destruction  of 
property  during  strikes,  riots,  &c.,  and  remove  all  ne- 
cessity for  private  watchmen.  Certainly  this  would  be 
the  most  effective  method  of  handling  these  troubles. 
A State  constabulary  or  police,  such  as  is  now  in  Mas- 
sachusetts, might  afford  some  means  of  protection.  Yet 
it  seems  probable  that  it  will  be  necessary  in  the  future 
to  employ  carefully  selected  watchmen  to  protect 
private  property  ; and  the  right  of  the  owner  thus  to 
protect  his  property  must  ultimately  be  upheld  by  the 
courts  and  public  opinion. 

New  York,  December  7th,  1892. 

Robert  A.  Pinkerton, 

William  A.  Pinkerton, 
Proprietors  of 

Pinkerton’s  National  Detective  Agency. 


UNITED  STATES  SENATE  INVESTIGATION 


OF  THE 

LABOR  TROUBLES  AT  HOMESTEAD. 


Statement  Submitted  by  William  A.  and 
Robert  A.  Pinkerton. 


New  York,  December  3d,  1892. 

To  the  Judiciary  Committee  of  the  United  States 
Senate. 

In  connection  with  the  testimony  of  Robert  A.  Pink- 
erton, we  have  prepared,  by  your  direction,  the  following- 
statement  as  to  the  nature  of  our  business  and  the  occur- 
rences at  Homestead,  Pennsylvania,  on  the  6tli  of  July, 
1892. 

It  may  be  of  aid  to  review,  again,  briefly  the  facts  and 
circumstances  immediately  preceding  the  riots  on  the  6tli 
of  July. 

During  the  month  of  June,  1892,  it  became  probable 
that,  upon  the  termination  of  the  existing  arrangement 
between  the  Carnegie  Steel  Company  and  its  workmen, 
some  disagreement  would  result  as  to  the  scale  of  wages. 
The  Company  owned  an  immensely  valuable  plant  and  had 
on  hand  large  contracts  and  orders  which  required  comple- 
tion within  a given  time.  The  Company’s  officials  knew 
from  past  experience — what  the  whole  community  knows — - 
that  in  case  they  failed  to  agree  or  accede  to  the  terms  of 
their  workmen  and  the  dictation  of  the  Amalgamated 


4 


Association,  there  would  be  a sudden  and  concerted 
cessation  of  work  at  a given  signal  or  order  and  attempts 
made  to  prevent  other  labor  from  filling  the  vacant  places. 
If  the  plants  shut  down  until  the  strikers  saw  fit  to  return 
to  work,  or  to  permit  others  to  fill  their  places,  great  and 
irreparable  injury  would  result,  involving  the  temporary 
abandonment  to  competitors  of  a trade  and  business  which 
had  taken  millions  of  investment  and  years  of  labor  to  estab- 
lish. On  the  other  hand,  the  works  could  be  operated 
without  loss  or  cessation  by  the  employment  of  non-union 
labor,  of  which  there  was  an  abundant  supply,  and  which 
would  certainly  be  attracted  to  Homestead  by  the  excep- 
tionally high  wages  paid  by  the  Carnegie  Company. 

It  was  reasonable  for  the  Company,  in  case  of  a fail- 
ure to  agree  upon  a scale  of  wages,  to  expect  trouble 
with  its  employees  and  to  anticipate  attempts  on  the 
part  of  the  latter  by  intimidation,  coercion  and  force 
to  prevent  non-union  men  filling  their  places.  In- 
deed, in  view  of  similar  strikes  during  the  last  thirty 
years,  it  would  seem  almost  puerile  to  argue  that  the 
employers  should  have  relied  upon  the  offers  and  preten- 
sions of  the  members  of  the  so-called  Amalgamated 
Association,  and  should  have  waited  until  their  new  work- 
men were  attacked  and  assaulted  and  their  property  pil- 
laged and  destroyed  before  apprehending  danger  thereto 
or  employing  watchmen  to  protect  them  or  calling  upon 
the  legal  authorities  for  the  enforcement  of  the  law. 

While  the  negotiations  were  pending  with  the  Amalga- 
mated Association,  which  in  case  of  disagreement  would 
inevitably  result  in  a strike  similar  to  that  of  1SS9.  the 
Carnegie  Company  applied  to  Pinkerton’s  Aational  Detect- 
ive Agency  to  ascertain  if  the  Agency  could  supply,  in 
case  of  necessity,  three  hundred  watchmen.  The  reputa- 
tion and  responsibility  of  the  Agency  guaranteed  to  the 
Company  the  character  and  conduct  of  the  men  to  be  sent. 


5 


Before  final  arrangements  were  made  or  tire  watchmen 
had  started  from  New  York  or  Chicago,  the  Carnegie  Com- 
pany applied  for  protection  to  the  High  Sheriff  of  Allegheny 
County.  He  conceded,  as  we  understand,  that  he  would 
be  practically  powerless  to  handle  such  a large  strike  and  to 
protect  the  lives  of  non-union  employees  if  any  attempt 
should  be  made  to  send  any  such  workmen  to  Homestead. 
In  or  about  Pittsburgh  or  Homestead  no  adequate  force 
could  have  been  obtained.  The  Sheriff  then  knew  that 
the  Company  proposed  to  employ  watchmen  at  their  own 
expense  to  protect  their  property,  and  agreed  to  swear  in 
these  watchmen  as  deputies  if  that  became  necessary. 
The  Agency  refused  to  send  any  watchmen  without  the 
knowledge  and  approval  of  the  local  authorities,  and  they 
were  sent  upon  the  distinct  understanding  that  the  men 
should  be  duly  deputized.  There  can  be  no  dispute  as  to 
these  facts. 

As  soon  as  the  strike  was  declared,  before  any  Pinker- 
ton men  had  been  sent  from  Chicago  or  New  York,  the 
so-called  Advisory  Committee  of  the  strikers  took  posses- 
sion of  Homestead  and  placed  pickets,  guards  and  sentinels 
on  the  different  streets  and  roads  and  at  the  works.  The 
Advisory  Committee  virtually  declared  Martial  Law  and 
took  possession  and  control  of  the  property  of  the  Com- 
pany. It  is  true  that  they  promised  not  to  injure  the 
Company’s  property,  and  to  protect  it,  but  it  was 
ridiculously  obvious  that  this  promise  of  protection  was 
coupled  with  the  condition  that  the  strikers  should  have 
their  own  way,  and  that  the  Company  should  not  presume 
to  employ  any  one  without  their  consent.  The  Advisory 
Committee  and  the  strikers  trampled  upon  the  law,  defied 
the  authorities,  constituted  themselves  judges  and  denied 
to  others  the  right  to  labor.  It  was  then,  and  then  only, 
that  the  final  orders  were  given  to  send  watchmen  from 
Chicago  and  New  York.  In  order  that  there  may  be  no 


6 


doubt  as  to  the  correctness  of  this  statement,  we  quote 
from  the  charge  of  Chief  Justice  Paxson.  of  the  Supreme 
Court  of  Pennsylvania,  to  the  Grand  Jury  of  Pittsburgh  in 
this  connection  : 

“ It  is  alleged  that  the  Advisory  Committee  did  more  than 
induce  others  not  to  accept  employment  from  the  Company; 
that  it  allowed  no  persons  to  enter  the  mills  of  the  Carnegie 
Steel  Company,  and  even  permitted  no  strangers  to  enter  the 
town  of  Homestead  without  its  consent ; that  it  arranged  and 
perfected  an  organization  of  a military  character,  consisting  of 
three  divisions,  with  commanders,  captains,  etc.  ; the  captains 
to  report  to  the  division  commanders  and  the  latter  to  report 
to  the  Advisory  Committee ; that  a girdle  of  pickets  was 
established  by  which  the  works  and  the  town  were  guarded 
like  a military  encampment ; that  these  pickets  arrested  every 
man  who  attempted  to  approach  either  the  town  or  the  works 
until  he  could  give  an  account  of  himself  which  was  satis- 
factory to  the  Advisory  Committee ; that  all  discussion  of  the 
wage  question  was  positively  prohibited ; that  all  these  and 
many  other  things  were  done  to  deprive  the  Company  of  the 
use  of  its  property,  and  to  prevent  it  from  operating  its  works 
by  the  aid  of  men  who  were  not  members  of  the  Amalgamated 
Association. 

It  was  in  this  state  of  affairs  that  the  Company,  apprehend- 
ing injury  to  its  property  and  its  possible  destruction,  applied 
to  the  High  Sheriff  of  Allegheny  County  for  protection.  That 
officer  made  an  effort  to  secure  100  deputies  to  go  to  Home- 
stead on  the  afternoon  of  July  5th.  He  succeeded  in  getting 
about  a dozen  who,  under  the  charge  of  a deputy  sheriff, 
attempted  to  enter  the  works  of  the  Company  in  order  to  pro- 
tect them.  They  were  driven  off  with  threats  and  the  author- 
ity of  the  sheriff  defied.  On  the  morning  of  July  6th  the 
Company  attempted  to  place  300  watchmen  into  the  works. 
The  men  were  selected  by  the  aid  of  the  Pinkertou  Agency  and 
were  in  charge  of  a deputy  sheriff.  Their  business  and  their 
only  business  was  to  protect  property  of  their  employers.  The 
landing  of  these  men  on  the  grounds  of  the  Company  was  re- 
sisted by  a large  crowd  of  men,  many  of  whom  were  armed. 
Guns,  pistols  and  cannon  were  discharged  at  the  watchmen,  and 
the  fire  was  returned  by  a portion  of  the  latter.  An  attempt 
was  made  to  destroy  them  by  the  rioters  by  the  use  of  dyna- 
mite and  burning  oil.  Finally,  after  a number  had  been  killed 
and  wounded  on  each  side,  the  watchmen  surrendered  to  the 
Advisory  Committee, — at  that  time  the  only  authority  permitted 


7 


to  be  exercised  at  Homestead.  Their  treatment  after  their 
surrender  has  few  chapters  to  equal  it  in  savage  warfare,  not- 
withstanding the  humane  efforts  of  a portion  of  the  committee 
to  prevent  it.” 

The  conduct  of  the  strikers  prior  to  July  5th  showed, 
beyond  quibble  or  doubt,  that  they  were  determined, 
peaceably  or  forcibly,  to  take  control  of  Homestead  and 
the  Carnegie  Company’s  works,  and  to  prevent  the  em- 
ployment by  the  Company  of  non-union  laborers,  skilled 
or  unskilled.  Had  they  shown  any  intention  or  disposi- 
tion to  act  as  law-abiding  citizens,  the  Company  could  have 
countermanded  its  order  for  watchmen.  It  was  obviously 
to  the  interest  of  the  Company  to  save  the  expense  they 
were  incurring  for  watchmen,  which  expense  might  last 
three  months  and  involve  an  expenditure  of  over  $1,500 
per  clay.  As  matter  of  fact,  however,  it  would  have 
been  the  extreme  of  folly  to  have  relied  on  the  good 
behavior  of  the  strikers,  for  the  Sheriff  himself  was  defied, 
and  the  whole  community  of  Homestead  coerced  and  ter- 
rified, as  the  statement  of  Chief  Justice  Paxson  clearly 
shows. 

The  acts  referred  to  by  Judge  Paxson  were  done  before 
there  was  any  public  suggestion  or  mention  of  the  employ- 
ment of  Pinkerton  watchmen,  and  the  conspiracy  which 
the  Advisory  Committee  and  strikers  entered  upon  was  for 
the  avowed  purpose  of  preventing  workmen  from  entering 
the  employ  of  the  Carnegie  Company  and  laboring 
for  the  exceptionally  high  wages  which  the  Company  paid. 
The  strikers  had  no  grievance  or  wrong  to  redress,  no 
danger  or  peril  to  anticipate  or  guard  against,  except  the 
advent  at  Homestead  of  other  workmen,  seeking  employ- 
ment for  the  support  of  themselves  and  their  families  and 
the  high  pay  which  the  strikers  had  refused  and  spurned. 
Yet,  it  is  urged  that  the  Carnegie  Company  should  have 
.submitted  to  the  authority  of  the  Advisory  Committee  and 


8 


have  accepted  the  protection  and  guard  of  the  strikers 
themselves ! 

There  was  only  one  vital  principle  at  stake  in  the  con- 
test between  the  Amalgamated  Association  and  the  Com- 
pany, namely,  whether  the  latter  should  be  allowed  to  em- 
ploy non-union  men.  This  the  Amalgamated  Association 
and  its  Advisory  Committee  were  determined  to  prevent,  by 
force,  if  necessary.  The  Company  refused  to  arbitrate  its 
differences  because  its  officials  desired  to  manage  their  own 
business,  and  more  particularly  because,  twice  before,  they 
had  arbitrated,  and  the  Amalgamated  Association  had 
refused  to  abide  by  the  decision  of  the  referees. 

The  Company  then  had  either  to  submit  to  the  strikers 
and  abandon  their  private  property  and  business  until  the 
strikers  saw  fit  to  permit  them  to  resume,  or  else  employ 
watchmen  to  protect  their  property  and  then  offer  employ- 
ment to  other  workmen.  The  argument  of  the  labor 
organizations  is,  that  they  should  have  adopted  the  former 
course  of  passive  submission,  and  that  a wrong  was  done 
to  the  strikers  in  the  employment  of  the  watchmen  and 
the  attempt  to  land  them  quietly  at  night  upon  the  private 
property  of  the  Company.  It  is  amazing  that  any  such 
argument  should  receive  the  sanction  and  approval  of  re- 
spectable people.  As  Chief  Justice  Paxson  says: 

“We  can  have  some  sympathy  with  a mob  driven  to  des- 
peration by  hunger,  as  in  the  days  of  the  French  Revolution, 
but  we  can  have  none  for  men  receiving  steady  employment 
at  exceptionally  high  wages  in  resisting  the  law  and  in  resort- 
ing to  violence  and  blood-shed  in  the  assertion  of  imaginary 
rights,  and  in  entailing  such  a vast  expense  upon  the  tax- 
payers of  the  Commonwealth.  It  was  not  a cry  of  ‘ bread  or 
blood  ’ from  famished  lips  or  an  ebullition  of  angry  passions 
from  a sudden  outrage  or  provocation.  It  was  a deliberate 
attempt  from  men  without  a grievance  to  wrest  from  others 
their  lawfully  acquired  property  and  to  control  them  in  their 
use  and  enjoyment  of  it.  * * * 

It  is  much  to  be  feared  that  there  is  a diseased  state  of  pub- 
lic opinion  growing  up  in  regard  to  disturbances  of  this  nature. 


9 


and  that  a confused,  if  not  erroneous,  view  of  tlie  law  bearing* 
upon  these  questions  has  found  a lodgment  in  the  public  mind. 
This  is  evidenced  by  the  comments  of  a portion  of  the  press,  and 
in  the  utterance  of  demagogues  who  pander  to  the  mob,  and 
of  politicians  who  hunger  for  votes.  It  finds  expression  in 
sympathy  for  men,  who,  without  a recognized  grievance, 
trample  upon  the  law,  and  the  rights  of  others,  yet  have  no 
sympathy  for  the  outraged  law,  or  the  laborer  who  is  beaten 
and  sometimes  murdered  in  his  efforts  to  seek  honest  employ- 
ment for  the  support  of  his  family  * * * 

The  company  had  the  undoubted  right  to  protect  its 
property.  For  this  purpose  it  could  lawfully  employ 
as  many  men  as  it  saw  proper,  and  arm  them,  if  neces- 
sary. Many  of  our  banks  and  other  places  of  business  are 
guarded  by  armed  watchmen.  The  law  did  not  require  it 
to  employ  as  watchmen  the  men  from  whom  it  anticipated 
the  destruction  of  its  works.  When  a man  seeks  to  pro- 
tect his  house  from  burglars  it  would  be  unreasonable  to  re- 
quire him  to  place  the  burglars  in  possession  for  that  purpose. 
So  long  as  the  men  employed  by  the  company  as  watchmen  to 
guard  and  protect  its  property,  acted  only  in  that  capacity,  and 
for  that  purpose,  it  mattered  not  to  the  rioters,  nor  to  the 
public,  who  they  were  nor  from  whence  they  came.  It 
was  an  act  of  unlawful  violence  to  prevent  their  landing  upon 
the  property  of  the  company.  That  unlawful  violence  amounted 
at  least  to  a riot  on  the  part  of  all  concerned  in  it.  If  life  was 
taken  in  pursuance  of  a purpose  to  resist  the  landing  of  the 
men  by  violence,  the  offense  was  murder.  * * * 

The  rights  of  the  men,  as  before  stated,  were  to  refuse  to 
work  unless  their  terms  were  acceded  to,  and  to  persuade 
others  to  join  them  in  such  refusal.  But  it  will  sustain  them 
no  further.  The  moment  they  attempted  to  control  the  works, 
and  to  prevent  by  violence,  or  threats  of  violence,  other 
laborers  from  going  to  work  there,  they  placed,  them- 
selves outside  the  pale  of  the  law,  and  became  riot- 
ers. It  cannot  be  tolerated  for  a moment  that  one  laborer 
shall  say  to  another  laborer,  ‘ Y ou  shall  not  work  for 
this  man  or  that  wage  without  my  consent,’  and  thus  en- 
force such  command  by  brutal  violence  upon  his  person.  And 
what  will  not  be  permitted  to  one  man  to  do  will  not  be  per- 
mitted to  an  organization  of  men.  * * * The  law  should  be  so 
enforced  from  the  Delaware  to  the  Ohio,  that  the  humblest 
laborer  can  work  for  whom  he  pleases  and  at  what  wage  he 
sees  fit,  undeterred  by  the  bludgeon  of  the  rioter  or  the  pistol 
of  the  assassin.  * * * 

We  have  reached  a point  in  the  history  of  the  State  where- 


10 


there  are  hut  two  roads  left  to  us  to  pursue.  The  one  leads  to 
order  aud  good  government,  the  other  leads  to  anarchy.  The 
one  great  question  which  now  confronts  the  people  of  this  coun- 
try is  the  enforcement  of  the  law  and  the  preservation  of 
order.  ” 

The  men  we  sent  were  carefully  selected.  More  than 
two-thirds  were  well-known  to  us  and  our  superintendents, 
for  they  were  either  in  our  employ  at  the  time,  or  had  pre- 
viously been  employed  by  us  as  watchmen  in  similar  work. 
We  felt  that  these  men  could  be  thoroughly  trusted  for 
integrity  and  sobriety.  The  remainder  were  men  recom- 
mended to  us.  and  their  written  applications  and  refer- 
ences are  on  file  in  our  office. 

Our  men  were  sent  at  night  by  barge  in  order  to 
prevent  a breach  of  the  peace.  It  was  hoped  and  expected 
that  they  would  land  upon  the  private  property  of  the 
company  without  the  knowledge  of  the  strikers.  Had  it 
been  known  that  the  strikers  would  fire  on  the  barges,  the 
men  in  charge  would  have  refused  to  start  from  Pittsburgh, 
and  no  attempt  would  have  been  made  to  go  to  Homestead 
unless  under  the  orders  and  command  of  the  Sheriff,  and 
after  our  men  had  been  duly  deputized. 

The  arms  were  sent  from  Chicago  to  the  Union  Supply 
Company  at  Pittsburgh.  It  was  our  desire  and  under- 
standing that  the  boxes  would  be  placed  inside  the 
Works  of  the  company  and  there  distributed  to  our 
men,  if  necessary,  after  they  had  been  sworn  in  as 
deputies.  They  were  not  shipped  to  Homestead  before 
the  arrival  of  the  watchmen,  because  the  strikers  had 
possession  of  the  place,  and  would  have  prevented 
the  delivery  of  the  arms  and  probably  confiscated 
them  if  sent  by  rail.  The  arms  were  sent  on  the  barges 
because  they  could  not  otherwise  be  landed  or  delivered 
at  the  property.  Had  the  arms  been  sent  by  rail,  as 
was  originally  intended,  our  men  would  have  beeu  abso- 


11 


lately  defenceless  on  tlie  barges.  Our  instructions  were 
that  our  men  should  not  be  armed,  unless  they  were 
first  sworn  in  as  deputies  by  the  Sheriff  of  Allegheny 
County,  and  the  men  would  not  have  been  sent,  under 
any  consideration,  unless  the  Sheriff  had  distinctly  prom- 
ised to  deputize  them.  In  nearly  every  strike,  our  men 
have  only  carried  arms  after  having  been  deputized  by 
the  legal  authorities. 

The  Sheriff  sent  his  deputy,  Colonel  Gray,  to  accom- 
pany our  men.  It  was  distinctly  promised  that,  upon  the 
first  sign  of  trouble,  they  would  be  sworn  in.  Before  the 
barges  reached  the  works  at  Homestead,  firing  commenced 
from  the  shore.  Hinde,  a capable  and  responsible  man, 
who  had  been  in  our  employ  for  ten  years,  was  in  charge  of 
the  watchmen.  As  soon  as  the  firing  began,  he  applied  to 
Gray  to  swear  them  in,  but  Gray  refused,  saying  that  it 
would  be  time  enough  when  they  got  to  the  Works.  As 
soon  as  the  barges  passed  the  bend  in  the  river  and  ap- 
proached the  bank  of  the  private  property  of  the  Carnegie 
Company,  Gray  again  was  appealed  to  for  the  purpose  of 
having  the  men  duly  deputized.  He  repeated  that  it  would 
be  time  enough  when  our  men  landed.  It  was  not  until 
after  Gray  had  been  thus  twice  requested  to  comply  with 
the  Sheriff's  promise  that  any  arms  were  distributed, 
Twelve  rifles  were  handed  to  some  of  our  most  reliable 
men.  An  attempt  was  then  made  to  place  on  the  bank  a 
gang  plank  from  one  of  the  barges.  The  strikers  at  once 
renewed  their  attack  by  firing  upon  the  barges.  At  this 
lire,  six  of  our  men  were  injured,  including  Hinde,  who 
was  hit  by  two  rifle  balls,  and  Klein,  who  was  killed. 
Prior  to  this  not  a single  shot  had  been  fired  from  the  barges. 

The  attack  was  made,  not  because  the  strikers  were 
suddenly  excited  or  exasperated  at  the  presence  of 
our  men,  but  because  they  believed  the  barges  con- 
tained non-union  laborers.  No  one  on  the  shore  knew 


12 


that  they  were  Pinkerton  men.  They  were  called  “ scabs  ” 
and  “black  sheep.”  Deputy  Sheriff  Gray  left  on 
the  tug  “Little  Bill,”  and  stated  that  he  was  going 
to  get  instructions  from  the  Sheriff.  Several  hours 
afterwards,  the  tug  endeavored  to  return  to  the  barges, 
but  was  fired  upon  and  driven  back  by  the  mob  on 
the  Carnegie  property.  It  was  after  this  that  Cooper, 
who  had  taken  command  in  Hinde’s  place,  hearing 
the  cries  and  yells  against  the  “scabs,”  stepped  for- 
ward and  explained  that  there  were  no  non-nnioii  men  on 
board,  but  merely  Pinkerton  watchmen.  Prior  to  this, 
the  mob  believed  that  they  had  been  attacking  non-union 
men  coming  to  take  their  places.  Indeed,  when  our  men 
surrendered,  their  hands  were  examined  to  see  if  they 
were  not  mechanics. 

The  labor  leaders  are  constantly  attacking  the  character 
of  the  men  employed  by  our  Agency.  * * * We  know 
of  no  complaints  on  the  part  of  our  employers  as  to  the 
integrity,  sobriety  and  behavior  of  our  watchmen  en- 
gaged in  these  strikes.  None  of  our  watchmen  have,  so 
far  as  we  knoAv,  ever  been  convicted  of  a crime.  Mr. 
Powderly,  who  is  at  the  head  of  the  Knights  of  Labor, 
charged  that  we  employ  men  of  bad  character,  although 
he  admitted  that  none  of  our  men  have  ever  been  convicted 
of  a crime.  His  testimony  before  the  Judiciary  Commit- 
tee of  the  House  of  Representatives  would  not  have  been 
permitted  in  a court  of  justice,  and  its  falsity  would  have 
been  easily  shown  had  he  been  cross-examined  by  any  one 
familiar  with  the  facts.  A few  examples  will  show  this. 
Thus, 

1.  Mr.  Powderly  stated  that  an  alien  named  Adolph  Pol- 
letscliek  “ was  engaged  by  our  agent,  who  made  no  inquiry 
as  to  who  or  what  he  was.”  When  employed  by  us, 
Polletscliek  spoke  English  fluently ; stated  that  he  wa  s a 


13 


citizen  of  tlie  United  States ; said  that  he  was  a member 
of  a prominent  Democratic  organization  in  the  City  of  New 
York,  and  that  he  had  resided  there  for  thirteen  years. 
He  further  represented  his  trade  as  that  of  a clothing  cut- 
ter, and  stated  that  he  was  compelled  to  leave  his  pre- 
vious employment  because  he  was  a non-union  man.  He 
referred  to  a reputable  firm  of  cloak  manufacturers  in  this 
city.  We  have  in  our  possession  his  application  for 
employment  in  his  own  handwriting,  certifying  to  the 
above. 

2.  It  was  further  charged  that  our  men  wantonly  and  reck- 
lessly fire  upon  bystanders,  and  in  support  of  this  assertion 
Mr.  Powder ly  cited  the  injury  to  John  McCarthy,  August 
1 6,  1890,  during  the  New  York  Central  strike.  As  matter  of 
fact,  we  can  show  by  credible  witnesses  that  McCarthy 
was  an  iron  moulder  by  trade ; that  for  two  or  three  days 
before  the  shooting  he  had  been  seen  throwing  stones  at 
the  brakemen  and  watchmen  upon  passing  trains;  that 
the  day  before  the  shooting  he  had  been  seen  with  a 
revolver  in  his  possession ; that  immediately  before  the 
shooting  he  filing  a stone  ivliich  hit  one  of  the  watchmen ; 
that  the  firing  was  done  by  one  of  our  men  who  was  a 
sworn  deputy  sheriff,  and  that  he  did  so  because  the 
lives  of  the  brakemen  and  watchmen  on  the  train  were  in 
peril,  and  it  was  his  duty  to  protect  them.  At  the  place 
where  the  shooting  occurred,  a great  many  strikers  were 
gathered,  abusing  the  brakemen  and  watchmen  (all  of  the 
latter  being  deputy  sheriffs),  and  throwing  stones  at  them. 
The  cars  were  going  down  a heavy  grade  to  the  New  York 
Central  bridge  crossing  the  Hudson  River  at  Albany,  and  it 
was  a matter  of  life  and  death  for  the  brakemen  to  be  at 
their  posts  and  to  have  the  train  under  control  in  order  to 
prevent  the  train  running  into  the  Hudson  River.  Dur- 
ing this  strike,  several  freight  cars  were  cut  loose  from 
the  rest  of  a train  by  strikers  and  started  down  this 


14 


incline,  and  if  it  had  not  been  for  the  heroism  of  a non- 
union man  named  Jones,  who  at  the  risk  of  his  life  jumped 
on  the  passing  cars  and  applied  the  brakes,  they  would 
have  been  thrown  from  the  bridge  into  the  draw,  which 
was  open.  At  the  time,  the  Troy  boat,  full  of  passen- 
gers, men,  women  and  children,  was  passing  through  the 
open  draw ; and  had  the  purpose  of  the  parties  who 
committed  this  fiendish  act  been  accomplished,  the  loss  of 
life  would  have  beeu  fearful. 

In  another  instance,  during  the  same  strike,  the  strikers 
attempted  to  wreck  the  Chicago  express  going  down  a 
steep  grade  into  West  Albany,  and  would  have  succeeded 
in  killing  or  maiming  a great  number  of  passengers  if  one 
of  the  railroad  ties,  with  which  the  obstruction  was 
made,  had  not  been  rotten.  Obstructions  were  re- 
peatedly placed  on  the  tracks  by  the  strikers,  and 
in  one  instance  a train  of  palace  cars,  filled  with  sleep- 
ing passengers  and  running  at  a high  rate  of  speed,  was 
thrown  down  a steep  embankment.  One  of  the  strikers, 
Thomas  Cain  a knight  of  labor,  was  afterwards  convicted 
on  his  plea  of  guilty  for  putting  obstructions  on  the  track 
during  this  strike,  and  confessed  that  he  and  John  Kier- 
nan,  another  knight  of  labor,  were  the  guilty  parties  in  the 
attempt  to  wreck  the  Chicago  express.  These  facts  can  be 
proved  by  numerous  witnesses,  and  Cain's  confession  is 
in  the  possession  of  the  District  Attorney  of  Rensselaer 
County.  Cain  further  testified  that  he  had  been  furnished 
money  by  Master  Workman  Lee,  who  conducted  this 
strike,  to  enable  him  to  escape. 

3.  Mr.  Powderly  then  stated  as  follows  : 

“ Was  it  not  proved  that  the  Pinkerton  agents  made  efforts 
to  induce  men  to  place  obstructions  on  the  tracks  during  t be 
Chicago,  Burlington  & Quincy  strike  ? ” 

This  malicious  and  preposterous  statement  is  absolutely 
without  foundation,  and  Mr.  Powderly  knew  this  when  he 


15 


sought  to  impose  on  the  Committee  of  the  House.  As- 
matter  of  fact,  members  of  the  Brotherhood  of  Locomotive 
Engineers  confessed  to  the  crime  of  placing  dynamite  on 
the  tracks  and  turned  State’s  evidence,  and  it  was  on  their 
testimony  that  their  companions  were  convicted. 

4.  Mr.  Powderly  also  stated  as  follows  : 

“During  the  continuance  of  the  Denver  & Rio  Grande 
strike,  some  years  ago,  we  employed  watchmen  to  watch  the 
Pinkerton  watchmen,  and  discovered  them  in  the  act  of  placing 
dynamite  on  the  tracks.  I believe  you  will  have  no  trouble  in 
securing  this  evidence.  ” 

This  is  equally  false,  and  must  have  been  made  delib- 
erately for  the  purpose  of  prejudicing  and  misleading  the 
Committee ; because  none  of  the  watchmen  of  the  Pinker- 
ton Agency  were  employed  during  this  strike  on  the  Den- 
ver & Rio  Grande.  It  is,  however,  singular  that  if  the 
strikers  discovered  and  witnessed  any  such  acts,  they  did 
not  have  the  men  arrested  and  prosecuted.  Certainly, 
there  was  no  possible  reason  why  they  should  refrain  from 
punishing  our  watchmen. 

5.  Mr.  Powderly  further  said  in  his  statement  to  the 
House  Committee : 

“ Who  is  to  prove  that  it  was  not  a ‘paid  agent’  of  the 
Pinkerton  Agency  who  placed  the  explosive  in  the  mould  dur- 
ing the  strike  at  the  Chicago  Stove  Works?” 

Yet  Mr.  Powderly  must  have  known  what  everybody 
familiar  with  the  matter  knew  at  the  time — that  the  offence 
was  committed  by  one  of  the  strikers ; that  he  was  an  old 
member  of  the  Stove  Workers  and  Moulders’  Union,  and 
that  he  was  arrested,  pleaded  guilty  and  was  sent  to  the 
penitentiary  for  his  crime. 

6.  Mr.  Powderly  also  stated  : 

“During  the  stone-cutters’  strike  in  New  York,  Pinkerton 
watchmen  were  on  guard  when  the  acid  was  poured  on  the 


16 


rope.  Why  were  they  not  watchful  enough  to  do  detective 
duty  then  and  arrest  the  perpetrators  of  the  dastardly  deed  ? 
Is  it  not  wonderful  that  the  alleged  damage  is  discovered,  just 
before  the  final  catastrophe  takes  place,  by  the  Pinkertons  ? ” 

The  facts  were  that  no  Pinkerton  men  were  employed  or 
-connected  in  any  way  as  watchmen  or  detectives  in  the 
stone-cutters’  strike  in  New  York  at  the  time  in  question. 
In  order  to  kill  non-union  men,  certain  parties,  believed 
to  be  strikers,  unwound  a part  of  the  rope  of  a windlass, 
and  during  the  night  poured  acid  on  the  rope  and  then  re- 
wound it,  so  that  the  next  day  non-union  men  might  be 
killed  in  ascending  with  the  stone  or  by  the  falling  stones. 

Another  late  instance  may  be  recalled  in  New  York 
where  a carman  was  killed  by  a striker  for  carting  boy 
cotted  stone. 

7.  Mr.  Powderly  further  charged  that  we  employed  a 
man  named  Webb,  who  was  implicated  in  the  murder  of  his 
wife.  Webb  was  of  good  reputation  previous  to  entering  our 
employ,  and  he  referred  to,  and  was  recommended  by.  some 
of  the  best  residents  of  Queens  County.  It  was  claimed 
that  his  wife  died  of  malpractice,  and  Webb  was  held  as  a 
witness  against  the  doctor.  The  doctor  was  discharged, 
and  Webb  was  not  charged  with  the  murder  of  his  wife. 

8.  Mr.  Powderly  claimed  that  there  were  seven  men 
killed  by  our  employees  at  East  St.  Louis.  As  matter  of 
fact,  we  were  not  engaged  in  any  way  in  connection  with 
the  shooting  on  the  East  St.  Louis  bridge,  and  none  of  our 
watchmen  were  employed  at  that  time  by  the  company  on 
this  work. 

9.  In  the  Pennsylvania  coke  strike,  the  shooting  was 
done  by  the  regular  deputies  of  the  Sheriff,  several  days 
before  our  men  arrived,  and  the  deputies  were  engaged  in 
defending  lives  and  property,  and  repelling  an  attack  upon 
themselves. 


17 


In  regard  to  the  matter  of  the  James  brothers  in  Mis- 
souri, to  which  Senator  Vest  also  has  referred,  it  may  be 
stated  that  the  woman  injured  was  the  mother  of  the  James 
brothers,  and  the  boy  killed  was  their  step-brother.  These 
James  brothers  were  notorious  outlaws  and  murderers,  and 
for  years  committed  murder  and  robbery  with  impunity. 
The  public  will  recall  the  condition  of  Western  Missouri 
at  this  time.  When  the  house  in  which  these  robbers 
lived  was  surrounded,  none  of  the  Pinkerton  detectives  or 
watchmen  were  present.  It  was  afterwards  shown  that  a 
ball  of  cotton,  saturated  with  camphene,  was  lighted  and 
thrown  into  one  of  the  rooms  of  the  James  brothers  (not  a 
sleeping-room,  as  stated),  in  order  to  see  who  was  present 
and  to  avoid  injuring  any  one  except  the  murderers. 
Some  one  came  into  the  room  (at  the  time  it  was 
said  to  be  Mrs.  James),  picked  up  the  ball  and  threw 
it  into  the  fireplace,  where  a log  fire  was  burning. 
This  resulted  in  an  explosion,  injuring  Mrs.  James 
and  killing  the  step-brother  of  the  James  brothers. 
The  investigation  made  immediately  after  the  occurrence 
showed  that  no  hand-grenades  were  thrown  and  no  shots 
fired.  In  any  event,  what  was  done  was  not  done  by  our 
employees. 

We  could  multiply  the  number  of  instances  in  which 
members  of  these  secret  labor  organizations  have  com- 
mitted crimes  to  aid  their  strikes  or  to  revenge  themselves 
upon  their  employers  for  not  submitting  to  their  terms. 
The  reign  of  terror  during  the  time  of  the  Molly  Maguires 
has  not  been  forgotten,  and  it  was  through  the  efforts  of 
the  Pinkerton  Agency  that  this  famous  organization  was 
broken  up  and  so  many  of  its  members  hanged. 

We  have  attached  hereto  a pamphlet  issued  by  Mr.  E. 
T.  Jeffery,  President  of  the  Denver  & Rio  Grande  Rail- 
road Company,  from  which  it  will  appear  how  insincere  is 
the  present  cry  of  the  labor  leaders  for  compulsory  arbi- 


18 


tration.  In  that  case  an  engineer  was  discharged  for 
insolence  and  disobedience.  A committee,  on  which  the 
engineer  was  represented,  unanimously  reported  against 
him  and  sustained  the  action  of  the  Company.  The  labor 
organization  then  threatened  to  strike.  The  Company 
offered  to  arbitrate,  in  order  to  avoid  the  great  loss  neces- 
sarily involved  by  a strike;  bnt  the  labor  committee, 
counting  on  the  immense  damage  they  could  inflict,  abso- 
lutely refused  to  submit  to  arbitration  and  ceased  work. 
This  occurred  only  a few  weeks  after  the  Homestead 
troubles. 

The  investigation  by  your  Committee  of  this  Denver  & 
Rio  Grande  strike,  and  many  similar  occurrences,  would 
show  to  what  extremes  of  socialism  and  anarchy  we 
must  inevitably  drift  if  the  leaders  of  these  secret  labor 
organizations  are  to  be  given,  by  sanction  of  law.  the 
power  to  dictate  to  employers. 

It  is  undoubtedly  true  that  the  great  majority  of  the 
members  of  these  secret  labor  organizations  are  law-abiding 
and  respectable,  and  that  a small  number  only  participate  in 
these  crimes.  Yet  it  seems  to  us  that  the  leaders  in  many 
instances  are  not  sincere  in  their  expressions  of  a desire 
to  uphold  law  and  order  and  to  protect  property.  It 
cannot  be  reasonably  doubted  that,  if  labor  organizations 
or  their  leaders  honestly  condemned  outrage  and  force, 
they  could  readily  discipline  and  control  their  own  mem- 
bers, and  we  should  no  longer  witness  the  scenes  that 
attend  nearly  all  strikes,  and  that  are  such  a disgrace  to 
labor  in  this  country.  Instead  of  being  condemned,  the 
outrages  so  committed  are  secretly  applauded,  and  the 
guilty  persons,  if  caught  and  indicted,  are  glorified  as 
martyrs  in  the  cause  of  labor. 

We  need  only  refer  to  a few  editorials  to  show  pub- 
lic opinion  upon  this  point.  Thus,  in  speaking  of  the 
Buffalo  switchmen's  strike  (at  which  no  Pinkerton  men 


19 


were  employed),  the  New  York  Times  in  the  issue  of 
August  16th,  1892,  said  : 

‘ ‘ When  they  resorted  to  arson  and  other  crimes  they  for- 
feited all  claim  to  sympathy  or  support,  and  justified  the  rail- 
roads in  refusing  to  take  them  back  on  any  terms.  There  is 
the  usual  plea  that  the  mischief  was  done  by  ‘ outsiders,’  but 
there  is  sufficient  evidence  to  hold  the  strikers  responsible  for 
it.  In  fact,  there  is  said  to  be  proof  that  it  was  deliberately 
planned  by  the  Switchmen’s  Union. 

Such  behavior  as  this  takes  all  force  out  of  the  workingmen’s 
protest  against  the  employment  of  Pinkerton  men  to  protect 
property  whenever  and  wherever  there  is  a strike.  If  they 
shoAved  themselves  peaceable  and  laAV-abiding  in  their  contests, 
there  would  be  no  excuse  for  employing  protection  of  that 
kind,  but  Avhen  they  demonstrate  that  a strike  means  that 
there  is  likely  to  be  violence  and  destruction  of  property,  they 
give  employers  the  right  to  provide  against  it.  The  public 
authorities  will  not  act  until  an  actual  outbreak  occurs,  and 
then  much  injury  may  be  done  before  the  lawlessness  can  be 
overcome.  Every  man  has  the  right  to  protect  his  property 
and  his  business  from  violent  and  lawless  attacks,  and  AA'hen 
workingmen  show  a disposition  to  resort  to  such  methods  they 
justify  the  employment  of  men  to  resist  and  repel  them.” 

In  speaking  of  tlie  same  strike,  the  Hew  York  Sun,  on 
the  17th  of  August,  pointed  out  that,  if  license  were  to 
be  given  to  the  labor  organizations,  it  could  only  end  in 
anarchy.  In  the  editorial  published  that  day  it  was  said  : 

“If  the  strikers  had  failed  to  obey  the  laAvs  of  the  union, 
they  Avould  have  been  cast  out  of  the  organization  in  short 
order  and  treated  as  ‘scabs.’  When  they  violate  the  laivs  of 
the  State  and  strike  at  the  very  foundations  of  civilized  society, 
the  union  leaders  have  only  mild  words  of  reproval  for  them. 
They  are  not  denounced  as  criminals.  Their  conduct  is  merely 
‘ not  countenanced  ’ by  their  leaders.  After  they  have  perpe- 
trated their  savage  atrocities  they  are  told  that  they,ha\re  not 
done  wisely.  So  far  as  the  union  is  concerned,  they  will  go 
unpunished.  They  will  laugh  at  Grand  Master  Sweeney’s 
righteous  sentiments,  for  they  know  that  his  rebuke  of  them 
will  end  with  mere  talk. 

During  this  Summer  the  strikes  at  Homestead,  at  Coeur 
d’Alene,  and  noAV  at  Buffalo,  have  been  accompanied  by  mur- 
der, murderous  outrages,  and  the  Avanton  destruction  of  prop- 


20 


-erty.  Here  in  New  York  violent  assaults  have  been  made  on 
non-union  workmen,  and  scarcely  a day  has  passed  for  a month 
past  when  such  exhibitions  of  savagely  have  not  been  reported 
as  occurring  among  strikers  in  some  part  of  the  Union.  Yet 
no  reports  have  come  to  us  that  organized  labor  has  subjected 
any  one  of  the  perpetrators  of  these  outrages  to  any  sort  of 
discipline  because  of  his  crime.  The  unions  have  seen  tlm 
lawlessness,  but  they  have  done  nothing  to  punish  it.  They 
hold  their  members  in  such  complete  subjection  to  their  will 
that  they  compel  them  to  throw  up  work  though  they  them- 
selves may  have  no  grievances  to  complain  of ; but  when  their 
strikers  have  assailed  life  and  property  as  barbarous  anarchistic 
outlaws,  they  profess  to  have  had  no  power  to  check  the  mob.  At 
great  expense  to  the  State  the  militia  has  to  be  called  out  for 
the  protection  of  society.  If  it  had  not  been  available,  the 
rioters  would  have  continued  their  depredations  and  extended 
and  aggravated  them.  Order  is  preserved  by  military  force. 
It  is  assailed  by  the  union  force.  That  force  is  not  held  in 
restraint  by  its  own  leaders.  They  boast  of  their  discipline, 
yet  they  profess  to  be  unable  to  prevent  the  lawless  excesses 
of  their  followers.  Only  after  the  crimes  have  been  committed 
and  the  militia  are  on  the  ground  to  preserve  the  peace  is  the 
anarchical  business  stopped.” 

It  is  pretended  that  there  would  be  no  acts  of  violence 
during  these  strikes  if  they  were  not  caused  by  the  Pink- 
erton men  or  the  exasperation  of  the  strikers  at  their  pre- 
sence. This  was  solemnly  urged  before  the  House  Com- 
mittee. Yet,  shortly  after  the  occurrences  at  Homestead, 
and  whilst  the  labor  leaders  were  professing  that  the 
whole  trouble  resulted  from  the  employment  of  Pinkerton 
watchmen,  the  community  was  shocked  by  the  outrages 
aud  the  destruction  of  property  at  Coeur  d'Alene  and 
Buffalo.  No  Pinkerton  watchmen  were  employed  or  were 
present  at  either  of  these  strikes.  The  conduct  of  the 
strikers,  however,  was  exactly  similar  to  that  at  Home- 
stead. They  were  determined  to  and  did  attempt  to 
prevent  the  employment  of  non-union  men.  If  your 
Committee  wl  investigate  those  strikes,  you  will  ascertain 
repeated  acts  of  lawlessness  on  the  part  of  the  strikers, 
who  did  not  hesitate  to  attack  the  militia. 


21 


The  enmity  which  the  labor  organizations  have  against 
our  Agency  would  exist  against  any  persons  attempt- 
ing to  protect  the  property  of  employers  and  the 
lives  of  non-union  workmen.  Whoever  may  be  thus 
employed,  whether  private  watchmen,  or  the  police,  or  the 
militia,  or  the  Federal  troops,  the  animosity  against  them 
will  be  just  as  strong  as  is  now  shown  against  our  Agency. 
It  is  undeniable  that  the  feeling  of  the  strikers  against  the 
troops  at  Homestead,  Coeur  d’Alene  and  Buffalo  was  bitter 
in  the  extreme,  and  that  if  the  strikers  had  not  been  over- 
awed by  the  large  bodies  of  troops,  the  latter  would  have 
been  also  attacked.  Indeed,  for  days  it  was  expected  that 
there  would  be  conflicts  between  the  troops  and  the  strikers. 
At  Buffalo,  the  strikers  and  their  sympathizers  stoned 
and  abused  the  troops.  The  feeling  among  the  labor 
organizations  in  this  State  against  the  militia  for  its  part 
in  the  Buffalo  strike  is  venomous  and  intense. 

If,  in  answer  to  the  demands  of  the  labor  leaders  and 
demagogues,  employers,  whether  corporations  or  indivi- 
duals, are  to  be  prevented  from  employing  watchmen  to 
protect  their  private  property,  we  reach  the  point  of 
anarchy  and  communism.  It  must  be  borne  in  mind  that 
in  large  cities  like  New  York,  the  police  are  so  efficient 
that  they  can  handle  strikes  without  outside  assistance ; 
but  that  in  communities  where  the  majority  of  the  inhabit- 
ants are  in  sympathy  with  the  labor  unions,  and  where  the 
police  force  is  small  and  inadequate,  it  is  practically  impos- 
sible to  furnish  the  necessary  police  protection.  It  can- 
not be  that  a large  police  force  is  to  be  maintained  all  over 
the  country  to  provide  for  these  occasional  emergencies 
and  the  community  taxed  to  maintain  them.  It  has  been 
repeatedly  shown  that  the  Sheriff  cannot  afford  protection 
through  a posse  comitatus.  In  such  communities,  there- 
fore, the  only  other  remedy,  if  watchmen  cannot  be  em- 
ployed, is  by  calling  out  the  militia,  which  involves  im- 


22 


mense  expense  to  the  State.  It  is  evident  that  it  is  to  the 
interest  of  the  employer  to  rely  entirely  upon  the  pro- 
tection of  the  police  or  the  militia ; for  if  such  protection 
is  effective,  the  expense  is  borne  by  the  taxpayers,  and 
not  individually  by  the  employer. 

The  leaders  of  these  strikes  always  seek  a time  when  the 
cessation  of  work  may  cripple  and  greatly  injure  the  em- 
ployer, just  as  at  the  present  time  arrangements  are  being 
attempted  to  be  made  for  a gigantic  strike  next  year, 
which  may  jeopardize  the  success  of  the  World’s  Fail-  and 
will  certainly  greatly  injure  many  large  interests.  Strikes 
without  notice  or  warning  have  been  frequent;  and  such 
strikes,  if  the  employers  are  unprepared  or  not  forew  arned 
mean  incalculable  loss.  The  men  abandon  work  at  a 
given  signal,  usually  without  reasonable  notice.  If  the 
labor  unions  forced  their  men  to  give  reasonable  notice 
of  their  intention  to  strike,  there  would  be  no  occa- 
sion for  employers  of  large  numbers  of  men  to 
have  detectives  among  their  laborers,  in  order  to  be 
advised  and  warned  when  to  expect  trouble,  and  the 
necessity  for  such  detectives  would  no  longer  exist.  But 
until  such  notice  is  given  or  made  compulsory,  the 
employer  must,  in  order  to  protect  himself,  ascertain  in 
some  way  or  another  when  to  anticipate  and  provide 
against  the  consequences  of  sudden  strikes. 

It  was  testified,  we  understand,  before  the  House  Com- 
mittee, that  our  men  were  cowards,  because  they  did  not 
charge  upon  the  crowd  and  take  possession  of  the  works. 
We  are  informed  that  they  could  have  taken  posses- 
sion at  any  time  before  ten  o'clock  with  fifty  or  seventy- 
five  men.  They  had  the  arms  and  the  ammunition.  But 
they  would  have  had  to  fire  into  the  crowd,  many  of  whom 
were  women  and  children,  and  would  have  had  to  kill 
numbers  of  them.  We  marvel  that  they  did  not  fire  into 
the  crowd  in  self-defence.  Certainly,  they  would  have 


23 


■' 


been  justified  in  doing  so.  They  simply  aimed,  where 
possible,  at  the  men  who  were  firing  upon  the  barges. 
Many  of  our  men  refrained  from  firing,  because  they  had 
not  been  deputized,  and  the  Sheriff’s  deputy  had  aban- 
doned them.  But  we  shall  ever  be  grateful  that  our  men 
did  not  fire  into  the  crowd  in  any  attempt  to  take  the 
works  by  assault,  and  that  additional  loss  of  life  was  thus 
avoided. 

You  have  requested  us  to  explain  the  history,  nature 
and  scope  of  our  business,  fit  is  divided  into  two  separate 
and  distinct  branches,  although  both  are  under  the  same 
management.  The  detective  bureau  has  nothing  whatever 
to  do  with  the  employment  of  watchmen.  The  detective 
business  was  founded  in  1850,  by  the  late  Allan  Pinkerton, 
the  father  of  the  present  managers,  and  shortly  afterwards 
he  began  to  furnish  watchmen  for  banks,  private  residences, 
warehouses,  etc.  The  reputation  of  the  agency  grew  and 
the  business  developed.  During  the  war  Allan  Pinker- 
ton acted  as  Chief  of  the  United  States  Secret  Service. 
Since  his  death  in  1884,  the  agency  has  been  con- 
tinued by  his  two  sons,  the  present  managers.  The  or- 
ganization is  a simple  copartnership,  consisting  of 
Robert  A.  Pinkerton,  of  Yew  York,  and  William  A. 
Pinkerton,  of  Chicago.  The  principal  offices  are  at  Yew 
York  and  Chicago,  and  there  are  six  branches,  viz.,  at 
Boston,  Philadelphia,  St.  Paul,  Kansas  City,  Den- 
ver and  Portland,  Oregon.  The  Chicago  office  and  the 
Western  branches  are  under  the  personal  direction  of  Will- 
iam A.  Pinkerton,  and  the  Yew  York  office  and  Eastern 
branches  are  under  the  personal  direction  of  Robert  A. 
Pinkerton.  The  various  branches  are  in  charge  of  super- 
intendents, who  are  known  to  us  to  be  men  of  integrity 
and  character,  and  who  have  been  in  our  employ  for  from 
fifteen  to  twenty-five  years. 

The  employment  of  watchmen  to  protect  buildings, 


i 


24 


stores,  banks,  docks,  shipping,  &c.,  is  entirely  distinct 
and  separate  from  our  detective  bureau.  The  business  of 
watching  and  guarding  private  property  is  extensively 
carried  on  in  all  the  large  cities  by  many  reputable  con- 
cerns, and  thousands  of  banks,  residences,  warehouses, 
offices,  stores,  docks,  shipping,  &c.,  are  thus  protected  ana 
guarded  by  private  watchmen.  This  branch  of  our  bus- 
iness has  been  conducted  since  1857. 

Instead  of  app lying  to  the  ordinary  employment  agen- 
cies or  advertising,  business  men  prefer  to  contract  with 
the  Pinkerton  Agency  for  watchmen,  because  they  can 
rely  upon  the  character  of  the  men  furnished  and  the 
responsibility  of  the  Agency  and  have  the  benefit  and  ad- 
vantage of  its  direct  supervision.  If  all  the  detective 
agencies  should  abandon  this  branch  of  the  business,  the 
ordinary  employment  agencies  or  advertisements  in  the 
papers  would  have  to  be  resorted  to.  We  have  never 
employed  men  as  watchmen  unless  they  were  well  known 
to  us  or  our  superintendents,  or  had  satisfactory  recom- 
mendations and  references.  We  have  employed  and  fur- 
nished hundreds  of  men  in  connection  with  about  seventy 
strikes,  and  an  investigation  of  our  records  would  con 
clusively  show  the  great  care  and  thoroughness  we  exercise  | 
in  selecting  them. 

The  first  strike  at  which  we  were  employed  was  that 
of  the  miners  at  Braidwood,  Illinois,  in  September  and  i 
October,  1866;  and  in  April,  1868,  we  furnished  men  at 
the  same  place.  The  next  strike  was  in  1874,  and  during 
the  last  eighteen  years  we  have  been  employed  to  protect  ! 
private  property  in  connection  with  seventy  strikes,  which  j 
is,  of  course,  a very  small  percentage  of  the  total  number 
of  strikes  during  that  period  in  the  United  States. 

Our  employees  have  been  opposed  in  all  parts  of  the  coun- 
try to  over  one  hundred  and  twenty-live  thousand  strikers, 
within  the  last  twenty-six  years,  and  in  nearly  every  hi- 


25 


stance  our  watchmen  have  been  assaulted,  stoned  and 
abused  for  doing  no  other  act  than  protecting  private 
property  and  the  lives  of  non-union  laborers.  And,  in  all 
that  time,  our  men  have  killed  only  two  persons, 
which  cases  were  accidental,  and  in  self-defence,  and 
where  our  men  had  been  deputized  by  the  proper  legal 
[^authorities,  and  upon  trial  were  duly  acquitted.  We 
‘'earnestly  submit  that  these  facts  should  prove  con- 
clusively that  our  men  are  selected  with  care ; that  they 
‘are  of  good  character,  and  that  they  do  not,  as  has  been 
charged,  wantonly  and  recklessly  lire  upon  the  strikers 
and  mobs  attacking  them.  It  would,  indeed,  be  extraor- 
dinary if  we  were  not  occasionally  misled  as  to  the  char- 
acters of  our  men ; we  owe  our  comparative  freedom  from 
(\  such  mistakes  to  the  care  we  have  always  exercised  in 
' their  selection — a care  well  known  and  relied  upon  by  the 
community  who  employ  us. 

We  have  always  approved  and  sympathized  with  labor 
organizations  when  directed  by  honest,  capable  and  con- 
servative leaders.  The  law-abiding  members  have  no 
quarrel  with  us,  nor  any  grievance  or  cause  of  complaint 
against  us.  We  have  never  violated  any  of  their  rights. 

!Our  detective  branch  may  have  sought  to  ascertain  when 
they  intended  to  strike ; but  it  is  only  fair  and  proper 
that  the  employers  should  have  this  information.  We 
have  never  clashed  with  the  temperate  and  law-abiding 
members  of  these  organizations.  We  have  never  done 
) more  than  to  protect  the  private  property  of  the  employers 
and  the  lives  of  non-union  workmen  from  attacks  by  law- 
1 less  members  of  the  unions,  whose  acts  tend  to  disgrace- 
organized  labor.  We  confidently  assert  that  the  decent 
and  orderly  members  of  these  organizations  deeply  deplore 
and  condemn  such  excesses  as  were  committed  at  Home- 
. stead,  Coeur  d’Alene  and  Buffalo,  and  we  venture  to  predict 
that  ultimately  the  great  body  of  laboring  men  in  the- 


26 


■country  will  recognize  that  it  is  to  their  interest  to  insis' 
on  the  enforcement  of  the  law,  and  the  preservation  o 
order,  and  that  all  in  this  country  must  be  guaranteed  tin 
absolute  and  free  right  to  protect  their  private  property  a 
and  to  work  for  whom  they  please,  at  such  wages  as  the? 
see  fit. 

The  bitterness  of  the  unions  against  employers  and  non 
union  men,  and  the  increasing  lawlessness  at  strikes  lmv< 
rendered  the  work  of  supplying  watchmen  extremely  1 tnj 
gerous  and  undesirable;  and  for  that  reason  we  prefer  no'; 
to  furnish  watchmen  in  such  cases,  although  formerly  I 
wTe  solicited  this  work. 

We  have  not  been  able  to  procure  a copy  of  the  testi 
mony  taken  by  your  Committee,  and  we  only  know  fron 
garbled  and  prejudiced  statements  in  the  press,  what  ha 
been  testified  by  other  witnesses.  We  court  the  fulles 
investigation  of  our  actions.  Had  we  been  given  th- 
opportunity  to  have  our  counsel  cross-examine  the  wit 
nesses  who  testified  against  us,  we  could  have  shown  hov 
false  and  unfounded  were  their  accusations.  It  seem 
grossly  unjust  that  the  man  Bruce  in  Chicago  should  b- 
permitted  to  slander  us  and  all  the  detectives  in  th 
United  States  with  impunity,  under  cover  of  testifying 
before  your  Committee  and  the  pietence  of  aiding  you  t- 
ascertain  the  truth. 

As  requested  by  the  Committee,  we  shall  submit  thj 
opinion  of  our  counsel,  Messrs.  Seward,  Guthrie  A Mora  wet  z. 
of  New  York,  under  whose  advice  we  have  acted  through 
out  this  wdiole  matter. 

Very  respectfully, 

William  A.  Plnkertox 

and 

Robert  A.  Pixkertox. 


27 


t [United  States  of  America,  \ 

South ern  District  of  New  York.  ) 

!' I Robert  A.  Pinkerton,  being  duly  sworn,  deposed 
and  said  that  he  had  read  the  foregoing  statement  and 
■ knew  the  contents  thereof,  and  that  the  same  was  true 
to  the  best  of  his  knowledge  and  belief. 

Robert  A.  Pinkerton. 

Subscribed  and  sworn  to  before  me  \ 
this  5th  day  of  December,  1892.  ) 

Arthur  L.  Kent, 

Notary  Public  in  Kings  Co., 

Cert,  filed  in  N.  Y.  Co. 


Denver  and  Rio  Grande  Railroad  Co. 


OFFICE  OF  PRESIDENT  AND  GENERAL  MANAGER. 


The  following  is  a statement  of  the  facts  leading  up  to 
the  strike  of  Engineers,  Conductors,  Firemen  and  Brake- 
men  on  the  Second  Division  of  the  Denver  & Rio  Grande  Rail- 
road, inaugurated  at  7 a.m.  on  October  1 5th,  1 892  : 


On  August  22d,  1892,  the  following  order  regarding  fast 
freight  trains  No.  61  and  64  was  bulletined  by  the  Division 
Superintendent,  Mr.  R.  M.  Ridgway: 


SECOND  DIVISION. 

Bulletin,  No.  23. 

Salida,  Colo.,  August  22,  1892. 

Conductors  and  Enginemen,  Second  Division: 

Train  and  Enginemen  on  trains  61  and  64  must  not 
detain  their  trains  to  get  meals  at  Malta  or  Glenwood. 

On  leaving  terminals  you  must  go  prepared  to  go 
through,  as  these  trains  must  make  time. 

(Signed)  R.  M.  Ridgway, 

Superintendent. 

This  was  bulletined  for  the  information  of  employes  at 
the  terminals  of  runs  on  the  Division. 


30 


On  August  24th,  two  days  after  the  issuance  of  the  bul- 
letin order,  Engineer  William  Gordon  was  listed  to  take 
west-bound  California  fast  freight  train  No.  61,  from  Min- 
turn  to  Grand  Junction.  As  the  train  was  ready  to  leave 
Minturn,  Engineer  Gordon  called  the  Trainmaster,  who  was 
in  Minturn,  upon  his  engine  and  informed  him  that  unless 
bulletin  order  No.  23,  relating  to  detentions  of  trains  61 
and  64  at  Malta  and  Glenwood  by  train  and  enginemen 
taking  meals,  was  recalled,  he  would  not  leave  Minturn 
with  the  train.  He  used  violent  language,  and  stated  he 
“did  not  care  a damn  if  he  never  worked  another  minute," 
he  would  not  go  out  until  the  order  was  recalled,  and  told 
the  Trainmaster  to  go  to  the  office  and  repeat  this  to 
Division  headquarters.  This  the  Trainmaster  did  at  once. 
In  order  to  avoid  contention  and  disarrangement  of  the 
train  service,  the  Division  Superintendent,  on  being  advised 
by  telegraph  of  the  situation,  directed  the  Trainmaster  to 
remove  the  order  from  the  bulletin  board,  and  train  No.  61 
was  then  taken  out  by  Engineer  William  Gordon. 

An  investigation  into  the  action  of  Mr.  Gordon  was 
ordered  by  the  General  Superintendent,  and  was  held  at 
Salida  at  10.30  a.m.,  October  3d,  at  which  were  present  the 
following  persons,  constituting  the  Board  of  Investigation: 

R.  M.  Ridgway,  Division  Superintendent,  Chairman, 

A.  W.  Jones,  Division  Master  Mechanic, 

J.  E.  Barnes,  Traveling  Engineer, 

G.  H.  Barnes,  Trainmaster, 

I.  G.  Baker,  Locomotive  Engineer  (selected  by  Mr. 

Gordon). 

The  following  is  a verbatim  transcript  of  the  proceed- 
ings of  the  Investigating  Board  : 

Mr.  Ridgway — Gentlemen,  this  meeting  is  called  for  the  purpose  of 
investigating  the  case  of  Engineer  William  Gordon  refusing  to  leave  Min- 
turn until  Bulletin  No.  23  was  recalled. 

The  following  letter  from  Trainmaster  Barnes  was  read,  as  well  as 
Bulletin  No.  23,  copy  of  which  will  be  found  above : 


Salida,  Colo.,  September  8th,  1892. 


Me.  R.  M.  Rid  gw  ay, 

Supt.  Salida,  Colo. 

Dear  Sir: — On  August  24tli,  as  train  61  was  getting  ready  to  leave 
the  yard  at  Minturn,  Engineer  William  Gordon  called  me  up  on  his 
engine  and  informed  me  that  the  bulletin  in  regard  to  eating  on  trains  61 
and  64  at  Glenwood  and  Malta  must  be  recalled  before  he  would  leave  the 
yard.  He  said  that  no  fireman  could  fire  a hog  from  Grand  Junction  to 
Minturn  for  him  without  having  something  to  eat  on  the  road,  as  they 

couldn’t  stand  it.  He  also  said  that  he  didn’t  care  a d n if  he  never 

worked  another  minute,  he  would  not  go  until  it  was  recalled,  and  for  me 
to  go  in  office  and  tell  them  so,  which  I immediately  done. 

Engineer  George  Gordon  was  present  and  expressed  his  displeasure,, 
but  not  in  such  a positive  and  violent  manner  as  William  Gordon. 

I only  said  to  them  that  if  they  had  used  a reasonable  length  of  time  at 
these  points  to  eat  in,  the  bulletin  would  never  have  appeared.  After- 
wards in  conversation  with  Geo.  Gordon  I said  that  enginemen,  in  fact  the 
whole  train  crew,  were  eating  too  long,  and  that  these  trains  were  impor- 
tant and  all  should  take  an  interest  in  making  good  time  with  them,  and  on 
account  of  our  inability  to  do  so  we  were  losing  freight. 

G.  H.  Barnes, 

Trainmaster. 

Mr.  Ridgway. — Please  give  us  the  dead  time  of  these  trains. 

Answer. — 61  has  20  minutes  at  Malta  and  15  minutes  at  Glenwood. 
64  has  17  minutes  at  Glenwood  and  18  minutes  at  Malta. 

G.  H.  Barnes. — This  letter  is  correct,  is  it  not,  Mr.  Gordon  ? 

Mr.  Gordon. — It  is  correct. 

Mr.  Ridgway. — Then  Mr.  Barnes’  report  of  the  case  is  correct,  is  it,. 
Mr.  Gordon  ? 

Mr.  Gordon. — As  near  as  I can  remember. 

Mr.  Ridgway. — I think  you  should  remember  whether  or  not  you 
said  you  did  not  care  a damn  whether  you  worked  for  the  Company  or 
not,  and  that  you  would  not  go  out  until  the  bulletin  was  recalled. 

Mr.  Gordon.— I was  pretty  warm  under  the  collar  and  thought  the- 
bulletin  was  unjust,  and  probably  I said  it. 

Mr.  Ridgway.- — I do  not  think  it  unjust.  We  do  not  want  to  de- 
prive the  men  of  a chance  to  get  something  to  eat,  but  we  want  to  get  our 
trains  through  on  time. 

Mr.  Gordon. — I would  like  to  ask  for  a little  information.  I would 
like  to  know  if  when  I come  out  of  Grand  Junction  late  and  get  to  Glen- 
wood I am  allowed  the  17  minutes  if  I am  behind  time. 

Mr.  Ridgway. — Certainly. 

Mr.  Gordon. — I have  got  to  oil  around  the  engine  myself  and  take- 
water,  and  that  takes  considerable  time. 


32 


Mr.  Ridgway. — Your  fireman  can  oil  one  side. 

Mr.  Gordon. — I have  been  in  the  habit  of  carrying  a lunch  with  me. 
I have  a family  in  Minturn.  Sometimes  I do  not  carry  one  out  of  Grand 
Junction  as  I have  to  have  it  put  up  at  a restaurant.  I will  tell  you  my 
reasons.  If  we  come  out  of  Grand  Junction  with  a lunch,  when  we  can 
get  to  Minturn  there  is  no  restaurant  open  where  we  can  get  anything  to 
eat,  and  the  fireman  is  in  no  condition  to  fire  an  engine  on  an  empty 
stomach,  as  he  is  compelled  to  do  when  we  come  out  of  Grand  Junction 
and  catch  the  run  to  Aspen,  and  he  cannot  get  anything  to  eat  without 
losing  a lot  of  sleep. 

Mr.  Ridgway. — You  will  admit  that  it  is  not  very  hard  work  to  fire 
from  Minturn  to  Glenwood. 

Mr.  Gordon. — Yes,  sir;  hut  the  hard  work  is  from  Glenwood  to 
Aspen,  on  train  65. 

Mr.  Ridgway. — I do  not  know  why  our  employes  should  not  carry  a 
lunch. 

Mr.  Baker. — Of  course,  a man  has  time  enough  to  eat  on  the  dead  time 
shown  on  card.  I do  not  think  that  Mr.  Gordon  took  the  right  means  to 
have  this  bulletin  cancelled.  If  he  thought  it  was  obnoxious,  he  should 
have  had  one  of  the  men  come  over  and  see  Mr.  Ridgway.  I think  Mr. 
Gordon  used  rather  unbecoming  language  in  regard  to  having  the  bulletin 
recalled. 

Mr.  Gordon. — I would  like  to  say  further  that  I did  not  think  that  the 
bulletin  was  just.  I wanted  to  live  up  to  instructions,  but  I did  not  see 
how  we  could  with  this  bulletin.  I do  not  like  to  have  a fireman  fire  an 
engine  for  me  on  an  empty  stomach.  I told  the  trainmen  that  we  did  not 
want  to  run  this  thing  into  the  ground.  I know  that  there  has  been  lots 
of  unnecessary  delays  at  Glenwood,  but  I claim  that  I have  not  caused 
them. 

Mr.  Baker. — You  say  that  you  were  not  making  a personal  complaint, 
but  that  it  was  made  for  the  fireman.  I think  that  the  fireman  should  be 
able  to  fight  his  own  battles. 

Mr.  Gordon.- — If  the  fireman  cleans  his  ash  pan  and  takes  coal  at 
Glenwood,  it  takes  about  all  the  time  allowed  there.  I have  often  cleaned 
the  ash  pan  myself  for  the  fireman.  I think  the  bulletin  was  an  impo- 
sition on  the  fireman  more  than  on  me.  If  the  fireman  cleaned  the  ash  pan 
and  took  his  own  coal,  he  would  not  have  time  to  eat.  If  we  could  eat  at 
Minturn,  it  would  be  a whole  lot  different;  and  they  can  not  get  sleep. 

Mr.  Jones. — Even  if  it  was  so,  it  does  not  justify  you  in  disobeying 
orders. 

J.  E.  Barnes.— I think  Mr.  Gordon  did  exceedingly  wrong  in 
refusing  to  go  out  until  the  bulletin  was  recalled,  even  if  it  was 
obnoxious  to  him.  I was  in  Minturn,  but  did  not  hear  the  conversa- 
tion. The  Trainmaster  told  me  that  Gordon  refused  to  go  out  until  the 
bulletin  was  recalled. 

Mr.  Jones. — This  appears  to  be  a clear  case  of  insubordination. 


Mr.  Gordon. — Supposing  I took  a lunch  with  me;  do  you  suppose 
I would  be  attending  to  my  business  while  I eat  it  ? I know  that  the  fire- 
man could  not  do  it. 

Mr.  Ridgway.— I think  a man  can  eat  on  an  engine  as  well  as  he  can 
take  out  a cigar  and  light  it  and  smoke. 

Mr.  Baker. — Could  not  the  head  brakeman  relieve  the  fireman  for  a 
few  minutes  while  he  ate  his  lunch  ? 

Mr.  Gordon. — I would  not  like  to  eat  while  going  through  Glen  wood 
Canon.  I usually  hang  out  of  the  window  while  going  through  there. 
I have  never  struck  any  rocks  there  ; perhaps  it  is  because  I am 
lucky. 

Mr.  Ridgway. — Well,  Mr.  Gordon  acknowledges  he  refused  to  gO' 
out  and  that  he  said  what  the  Trainmaster  states  in  his  letter. 

G.  H.  Barnes. — There  were  no  messages  in  regard  to  the  matter.  I 
was  at  the  key  myself  talking  with  the  Dispatcher  and  told  him  that 
Gordon  refused  to  go  out  until  the  bulletin  was  recalled. 

Mr.  Baker. — I think  you  should  have  had  some  representative  man 
come  to  see  Mr.  Ridgway  about  the  matter.  Mr.  Ridgway  is  a pretty 
reasonable  man  about  letting  men  eat. 

Mr.  Gordon.— I scarcely  ever  go  over  the  road  but  what  there  is  from 
two  and  a half  to  four  hours’  delayed  time.  I never  get  any  letters  in 
regard  to  it. 

Mr.  Baker.  — Perhaps  the  engine  does  a little  fast  running  and  covers 
some  of  it  up. 

Mr.  Ridgway. — I presume  that  these  delays  are  doing  local  -work  and 
meeting  trains,  and  are  so  reported  by  the  conductors. 

Mr.  Gordon. — Well,  so  far  as  I am  concerned,  I do  not  want  to 
answer  for  the  shortcomings  of  other  men  on  the  road,  but  I am  willing  to 
suffer  for  my  own.  I have  always  tried  to  work  for  the  interests  of  the 
Company,  and  do  not  think  that  anybody  can  say  that  I have  not.  Of 
course,  I did  wrong  in  acting  as  I did  about  this  business,  but  at  the  time 
I thought  I did  right,  as  1 did  not  think  a man  capable  of  doing  his  work 
on  an  empty  stomach. 

Mr.  Ridgway. — I believe  that  this  is  all,  gentlemen,  unless  you  have 
something  more  to  say  on  the  subject. 

Findings  : 

Engineer  Gordon  acknowledges  having  used  the  language  in  his 
conversation  with  Mr.  Barnes  at  Minturn,  as  reported,  and  that  he  refused 
to  obey  the  bulletin  order  or  go  out  until  it  was  recalled. 

A copy  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Board  of  Investigation 
was  forwarded  to  the  General  Superintendent  on  October 
4th,  with  the  following  letter  of  transmission,  signed  by 
Mr.  R.  M.  Ridgway,  Superintendent  of  Division,  and  Mr. 
A.  W.  Jones,  Master  Mechanic. 


34 


Salida,  Colo.,  October  4th,  1892. 

Me.  N.  W.  Sample, 

General  Superintendent,  Denver. 

Dear  Sir: — Herewith  we  return  all  papers  in  case  of  Wm.  Gordon, 
engineer,  with  report  of  the  investigation  attached. 

You  will  note  that  Engineer  Gordon  acknowledges  having  used  the 
language  as  reported  by  Trainmaster  Barnes,  also  that  he  refused  to  obey 
the  bulletin  order  or  go  out  on  train  Cl  of  August  24th  until  it  was 
recalled. 

This  is  a case  that  merits  dismissal  from  the  service,  and  we  would 
recommend  that  it  be  done. 

Yours  truly, 

(Signed.)  R.  M.  R mo  way. 

Superintendent . 

(Signed.)  A.  W.  Joxes, 

Master  Mechanic. 

The  General  Superintendent  in  considering  the  matter 
gave  due  weight  to  the  previous  record  of  Engineer  Gordon, 
and  in  consideration  thereof,  overruled  the  recommendation 
of  the  Division  Superintendent  and  Master  Mechanic,  and 
directed  that  Engineer  Gordon  be  suspended  for  thirty  days, 
as  set  forth  in  the  following  letter  to  Division  Superintendent 
Ridgway : 

Deyyer,  Colo.,  October  7th,  1892. 

R.  M.  Ridgway,  Esq., 

Division  Superintendent,  Salida,  Colo. 

Dear  Sir  : Your  favor  of  the  4th  iust.  attached  to  report  of 
investigation  in  the  matter  of  Engineer  Wm.  Gordon  refusing  to  obey 
bulletin  order  on  August  24th,  or  to  go  out  on  train  Xo.  61  until  it  was 
recalled,  received. 

While  the  discipline  recommended  is  perhaps  proper  for  the  offence, 
in  consideration  of  his  long  service  and  previous  record  (which  is  above 
the  average),  1 think  thirty  days’  suspension  will  serve  to  keep  him 
reminded  of  his  conduct  on  this  occasion,  and  you  will  please  notify  the 
Master  Mechanic  to  this  effect,  who  will  send  the  usual  papers  in  the  case 
to  this  office. 

Yours  truly, 

(Signed.)  X.  W.  Sample, 

General  Superintendent. 

In  conformity  with  the  order  of  the  General  Superin- 
tendent, Engineer  William  Gordon  was  notified  of  the  deci- 
sion, his  suspension  taking  effect  from  October  2nd,  the  day 


35 


rne  was  taken  from  his  run  pending  investigation  and 
■decision. 

The  care  taken  to  obtain  all  the  facts,  and  in  a calm 
and  judicial  spirit  take  action  in  the  case,  is  illustrated  by 
the  deliberation  and  patience  shown  in  the  action  of  the 
•officers  as  above  outlined. 

The  case  was  taken  up  by  the  employes  of  the  Second 
Division,  and  apparently  secret  meetings  were  held,  and  at 
2:10  o’clock  on  the  morning  of  Saturday,  October  15th,  the 
following  message  was  received  by  General  Superintendent 
Sample,  at  his  residence  in  Denver: 

Minturn,  Colo.,  Oct.  14th,  1892. 

Mr.  N.  W.  Sample, 

General  Superintendent  D.  & B.  G.,  Denver. 

By  action  of  employes  taken  at  a Union  meeting  at  Minturn, 
■October  7th,  we  as  a committee  hereby  request  the  reinstatement 
of  Engineer  William  Gordon  and  full  time  from  the  date  of  his  sus- 
pension. This  matter  to  be  made  known  by  a bulletin  being  posted 
at  Salida,  Leadville,  Minturn  and  Grand  Junction.  This  bulletin  to 
be  conspicuously  posted  by  7 o’clock  a.  m.,  October  loth,  and  unless 
such  bulletin  is  posted  by  such  time,  we  as  the  engineers,  conductors, 
firemen  and  brakemen  positively  refuse  to  handle  trains  on  Second 
Division  after  7 o’clock  a.  m.,  October  loth. 

By  order  of 

(Signed.)  Committee. 

In  accordance  with  the  threat  expressed  in  the  telegram 
the  engineers,  conductors,  firemen  and  brakemen  of  the 
second  division  which  extends  from  Salida  to  Grand  Junc- 
tion, abandoned  and  refused  to  t*ake  out  their  trains  at 
seven  o’clock  in  the  morning  of  the  same  day  (the  15th  of 
October,  1892,)  and  no  trains  have  moved  over  the  division 
since  that  time.  As  early  as  practicable  after  receipt  of  the 
above,  and  on  the  morning  of  the  same  day,  the  General 
Superintendent  telegraphed  to  Superintendent  Ridgway  and 
Master  Mechanic  Jones,  as  follows: 

Denver,  Colo.,  October  15th,  1892. 

R.  M.  Ridgway,  A.  W.  Jones, 

Salida. 

At  two  ten  this  morning,  much  to  my  surprise,  the  following 
message  was  delivered  at  my  house : 


36 


Minturn,  Colo.,  October  14th,  1892. 

To  N.  W.  Sample, 

General  Superintendent  I).  & R.  G.,  Denver. 

By  action  of  employes  taken  at  a Union  meeting  at  Minturn, 
October  17th,  we,  as  a committee  hereby  request  the  reinstatement  of 
Engineer  W.  Gordon,  and  full  time  paid  from  the  date  of  his  suspen- 
sion. This  matter  to  be  made  known  by  bulletin  being  posted  at 
Salida,  Leadville,  Minturn  and  Grand  Junction ; this  bulletin  to  be 
conspicuously  posted  by  seven  o’clock  a.  m.,  October  lath,  and  unless 
such  bulletin  is  posted  by  such  time  we,  as  the  engineers,  conductors, 
firemen,  and  brakeman,  positively  refuse  to  handle  trains  on'  Second 
Division  after  seven  o’clock  A.  M. , October  fifteenth. 

By  order  of  (Signed)  Committee.  ” 

You  will  see  that  no  names  are  appended  to  the  telegram 
nor  was  any  conference  asked  for,  nor  the  least  consideration  shown  to 
the  Company,  nor  to  me  personally  as  the  General  Superintendent. 
I doubt  if  any  set  of  railway  men  in  the  United  States  ever  acted 
as  arbitrarily,  and  with  less  regard  to  the  interest  of  their  company,  than 
have  the  men  on  the  Second  Division  in  this  case.  It  seems  to  be 
impossible  for  reasonable  and  right  thinking  men  to  continue  this  course, 
and  if  it  has  not  already  been  done,  I wish  that  you  and  Master  Mechanic 
Jones  would  at  once  confer  with  some  of  the  Second  Division  engineers 
and  conductors  for  the  purpose  of  showing  them  the  wrongfulness  of  the 
action  taken.  (Signed.)  N.  W.  Sample. 

The  notification  received  by  the  General  Superintend- 
ent at  2:10  a.  m.,  October  15,  five  hours  before  that  portion 
of  the  line  was  tied  up,  was  the  first  information,  or  even 
intimation,  received  by  the  company  of  the  contemplated 
strike.  * 

Believing  that  friendly  conferences  between  employer 
and  employes  for  the  purpose  of  adjusting  differences  are 
desirable,  and  that  to  avert  a strike,  disastrous  alike  to  the 
company  and  the  men,  and  in  its  effects  greatly  injurious  to 
the  public,  arbitration  in  this  case  might  be  resorted  to,  the 
following  telegram  was  sent  at  5:16  p.  m.  to  the  Division 
Superintendent. 

Denver,  Colo.,  October  loth,  1892. 

R.  M.  Ridgway, 

Salida. 

I shall  be  glad  to  confer  with  any  committee  of  our  employes  for  the 
adjustment  of  any  grievances,  and  if  we  cannot  agree,  am  willing  to 


arbitrate  matters  of  difference ; in  the  meantime,  the  men  should  return  to 
and  remain  at  work  pending  the  adjustment,  either  by  conference  or 
arbitration.  The  Company  has  always  treated  its  employes  liberally  and 
justly,  and  the  present  strike,  almost  without  notice,  will  not  be  sustained 
by  railway  employes  generally,  or  the  public.  Give  a copy  of  this  message 
to  the  committee. 

(Signed.)  1ST.  W.  Sample. 


To  this  the  following  reply  was  received  by  the  Division 
Superintendent,  and  immediately  transmitted  by  telegraph 
to  the  General  Superintendent: 


N.  W.  Sample, 

Denver. 


Salida,  October,  loth,  1892.. 


Following  report  from  the  committee  received. 

(Signed.)  R.  M.  Ridgwat. 


Salida,  October  loth,  1892. 

R.  M.  Ridgwat, 

Salida. 

We,  the  employes  of  Second  and  Third  Divisions,  instruct  our 
committee  to  inform  you  that  we  will  not  accept  Mr.  Sample’s  terms, 
and  that  we  will  remain  out  until  a settlement  is  made  amicable  to  our- 
selves. 

(Signed.)  Employes  Train  and  Motive  Power  Depart- 
ments, Second  and  Third  Divisions. 

From  the  foregoing  it  will  be  seen  that  even  arbitra- 
tion, for  which  so  many  labor  organizations  have  contended, 
is  refused  by  the  men  through  their  duly  appointed  com- 
mittee. 

E.  T.  JEFFERY, 

President , 


Denver,  October  16th,  1892, 


38 


Proceedings  of  the  Judiciary  Committee  of  the  House 
of  Representatives. 

In  the  House  of  Representatives  on  May  12,  1892, 
Mr.  Oates,  from  the  Committee  on  the  Judiciary,  sub- 
mitted the  following-  report,  which  was  adopted  : 

“ The  House  of  Representatives  having  ordered  this  commit- 
tee to  report  back  the  resolution  proposing  an  investigation  of 
the  Pinkerton  Detective  Agency,  the  Committee  on  the  Judici- 
ary, having  had  the  same  under  consideration,  report  therefor 
the  following  substitute  and  recommend  its  adoption: 

“ Whereas , it  has  been  alleged  that  a certain  organization 
known  as  the  Pinkerton  detectives  has  been  employed  unlaw- 
fully and  to  the  detriment  of  the  public  by  railroad  corpora- 
tions engaged  in  the  transportation  of  the  United  States  mails 
and  interstate  commerce:  Therefore,  be  it 

“ Resolved , that  the  Committee  on  the  Judiciary  be,  and  it  is 
hereby,  directed  to  investigate  the  said  Pinkerton  detectives,  to 
wit:  The  character  of  their  employment  by  corporations  engaged 
in  the  transportation  of  interstate  commerce  or  the  United  States 
mails,  the  numbers  so  employed,  and  whether  such  employ- 
ment has  provoked  breaches  of  the  peace  or  caused  the  destruc- 
tion of  property,  and  all  the  material  facts  connected  with  their 
alleged  employment,  and  to  report  the  same  to  this  House  bv 
bill  or  otherwise  at  any  time.  And  to  this  end,  the  said  Com- 
mittee on  the  Judiciary  is  hereby  authorized  and  empowered  to 
issue  and  cause  to  be  served  processes  for  the  production  of 
papers  and  to  procure  the  attendance  of  witnesses,  to  administer 
oaths,  and  to  employ  a clerk  and  stenographer  if  necessary,  and 
any  sub-committee  of  said  Judiciary  Committee  is  hereby 
invested  with  like  powers,  for  the  purpose  aforesaid,  and  may 
sit  wherever  deemed  necessary,  and  during  the  sessions  of  the 
House.  All  of  the  expenses  of  such  investigation  shall  be  paid 
out  of  the  contingent  fund  of  the  House  upon  proper  vouchers,, 
certified  as  correct  by  the  chairman  of  the  said  committee  or 
sub-committee,  not  to  exceed  the  aggregate  sum  of  two  thou- 
sand dollars,  which  the  Clerk  of  the  House  of  Representatives  is. 


39 


hereby  directed  to  turn  over  to  the  chairman  of  such  sub-com- 
mittee, not  exceeding  one  thousand  dollars  at  a time,  taking  his 
receipt  therefor,  and  which  shall  be  accounted  for  by  him  to 
said  clerk  in  the  manner  aforesaid,  the  same  to  be  immediately 
available.” 

On  July  6,  1892,  in  the  House  of  Representatives, 
Mr.  Williams,  of  Massachusetts,  submitted  the  follow- 
ing resolution  : 

“ Whereas , the  Pinkerton  detective  or  private  police  force,  to 
the  number  of  several  hundred,  is  now  engaged  in  an  armed 
conflict  at  Homestead,  Pa.,  with  the.late  employees  of  the  Car- 
negie Iron  Works  at  said  place,  and  great  loss  of  human  life 
and  destruction  of  property  are  likely  to  result  from  the  same  ; and 
“ Whereas , the  Judiciary  Committee  has  been  directed  by  a 
resolution  of  the  House  to  investigate  the  nature  and  character 
of  the  employment  of  Pinkerton  detectives  by  corporations 
engaged  in  interstate  commerce;  therefore,  be  it 

“ Resolved , that  said  committee  shall  investigate  and  report  on 
the  character  of  the  employment  of  said  forces  in  the  present 
instance,  and  the  causes  and  conditions  of  the  sanguinary  con- 
flict now  going  on  at  Homestead,  Pa.” 

This  resolution  was  referred  to  the  Committee  on  the 
Judiciary  and  was  reported  back  favorably  on  July  7, 
1892,  and  adopted  with  the  following  amendment : 
“That  the  committee  be  instructed  to  inquire  whether  or  not 
the  employment  of  Pinkerton  detectives  has  any  connection 
with  the  present  system  of  Federal  taxation.” 


Extract  from  Official  Report,  52c!  Congress,  1st  Session, 
Misc.  Doc.  No.  325. 

Committee  Room  of  Committee  on  Judiciary, 
Washington,  D.  C.,  July  22,  1892. 

The  sub-committee  of  the  t_ommittee  on  the  Judici- 
ary appointed  to  investigate  the  employment  of  Pink- 


40 


erton  detectives  in  connection  with  the  transportation 
of  interstate  commerce  and  the  recent  labor  troubles  at 
Homestead,  Pa.,  this  day  met  at  10  a.m.,  Hon.  Wm. 
C.  Oates  in  the  chair. 

Present,  the  Chairman,  Mr.  Bynum,  and  Mr.  Broderick. 

Robert  A.  Pinkerton,  sworn  and  examined. 

By  the  Chairman  : 

O.  Please  give  the  stenographer  your  full  name  and 
residence?  A.  Robert  A.  Pinkerton,  39  Eighth  Av- 
enue, Brooklyn. 

I desire  to  present  a statement  which  I have  drawn 
up  and  which  I hand  to  the  committee  [handing  state- 
ment to  the  chairman  of  himself  and  William  A. 
Pinkerton]. 

At  this  point  John  Devlin,  A.  W.  Wright  and  John 
W.  Hayes,  secretary  general  executive  board  of  the 
Knights  of  Labor,  presented  to  the  committee  a list  of 
questions  which  the  said  Devlin  and  his  associates 
desired  answered.  They  made  the  request  on  behalf 
of  the  Knights  of  Labor. 

The  committee  retired  to  examine  the  statement  of 
the  Messrs.  Pinkerton  and  the  list  of  questions  offered, 
and  on  their  return  the  statement  was  allowed  to  go  in 
as  a presentation  of  their  case  and  not  as  evidence,  and 
the  questions  were  allowed  to  be  put.  The  statement 
of  the  Pinkertons  is  as  follows  : 

Washington,  D.  C.,  July  22,  1892. 

To  the  Judiciary  Committee  of  the  House  of  Represent- 
atives: 

You  have  asked  us  to  appear  before  you  and  testify 
in  regard  to  the  business  conducted  by  us  under  the 


41 


name  of  Pinkerton’s  National  Detective  Agency.  The 
present  inquiry  by  your  committee  arises  from  the 
recent  deplorable  events  at  Homestead,  in  the  State  of 
Pennsylvania,  and  we  are  informed  that  a statement  on 
our  part  of  our  connection  with  strikes  and  of  the 
general  method  of  carrying  on  this  branch  of  our  busi- 
ness will  aid  the  committee  in  its  investigation. 

o 

The  agency  was  founded  in  1850  by  the  late  Allan 
Pinkerton,  and  during  the  last  twenty  years  it  has  fre- 
quently furnished  private  watchmen  to  protect  the 
property  of  individuals  and  corporations  during  strikes. 
The  men  employed  by  us  in  this  strike  work  are 
selected  with  great  care,  and  only  after  a full  investiga- 
tion of  their  characters  and  antecedents.  Not  a single 
instance  can  be  cited  where  we  have  knowingly  em- 
ployed unreliable  or  untrustworthy  men,  or  where  any 
of  our  watchmen  have  been  convicted  of  a crime. 
Moreover,  we  have  seldom  permitted  our  watchmen  to 
carry  arms  for  the  purpose  of  protecting  property  and 
life  unless  they  were  authorized  by  the  proper  legal 
authorities  or  sworn  in  as  deputy  sheriffs.  Our  men 
have  never  wantonly  or  recklessly  fired  a single  shot  in 
any  of  these  strikes,  and  have  only  used  dieir  arms  as 
the  last  extremity  and  in  order  to  protect  life.  We  have 
consistently  refused  to  permit  our  watchmen  to  bear 
arms  without  special  legal  authority  or  as  deputy  sher- 
iffs, even  when  on  private  property,  and  we  had  no 
intention  of  varying  from  this  rule  in  the  Homestead 
strike. 

When  first  requested  to  send  watchmen  to  protect 
the  Homestead  plant  and  property  of  the  Carnegie 
Steel  Company,  Limited,  we  refused  to  do  so  unless  all 
our  men  should  be  sworn  in  as  deputy  sheriffs  before 


42 


going  to  Homestead.  We  were  then  assured  that  the 
sheriff  of  Allegheny  County,  Pa.,  knew  that  our  men 
were  going  to  Homestead  to  act  as  watchmen  and  to 
guard  the  property  of  the  company  and  protect  its 
workmen  from  violence.  We  were  further  assured  that 
the  sheriff  had  promised,  immediately  upon  any  out- 
break or  disturbance,  to  deputize  all  our  watchmen  as 
sheriff’s  deputies  if  it  became  necessary  for  the  protec- 
tion of  life  and  property.  On  that  condition  only  did 
we  consent  to  furnish  about  three  hundred  watchmen. 
A lame  number  of  these  men  were  our  regular  em- 

o o 

ployees,  who  could  be  thoroughly  trusted  for  integrity, 
prudence  and  sobriety.  The  remainder  were  men  whom 
we  employed  from  time  to  time,  or  who  were  known 
and  recommended  to  us.  They  did  not  go  into  the 
State  of  Pennsylvania  as  an  armed  body  or  force,  and 
we  should  not  have  permitted  or  assented  to  this. 
There  was  no  intention  or  purpose  whatever  of  arming 
them  until  they  were  on  the  property  of  the  company 
at  Homestead  and  until  and  unless  they  had  been  sworn 
in  as  the  sheriff’s  deputies. 

The  Sheriff’s  Chief  Deputy  Gray  accompanied  our 
men,  being’  on  the  tug  towing  the  barges,  and  it  was 
distinctly  understood  that  he  had  authority  duly  to 
deputize  them  in  case  of  necessity.  The  boxes  contain- 
ing the  arms  and  ammunition  were  shipped  from 
Chicago,  and  were  to  be  delivered  at  the  Homestead 
yards.  The  instructions  to  our  men  were  that  they 
should  not  be  armed  unless  previously  deputized  by 
the  sheriff.  As  a matter  of  fact,  the  boxes  on  board 
the  barges  were  not  opened  and  the  arms  and  ammuni- 
tion were  not  distributed  until  after  the  strikers  had 
commenced  firing  on  the  watchmen  and  it  became  evi- 


43 


dent  that  it  was  a matter  of  self-defense,  for  life  or 
death.  Klein  had  been  murdered  by  the  strikers,  and 
about  five  other  watchmen  shot  and  wounded  before 
our  men  began  their  fire  in  self-defense.  Even  then  it 
was  impossible  to  attempt  to  shoot  those  firing  at  the 
barges,  because  the  strikers  made  a breastwork  for 
themselves  by  placing  women  and  children  in  front  and 
firing  from  behind  them.  Not  a single  woman  or  child 
was  injured  by  our  men. 

When  our  men  surrendered,  the  leaders  of  the  strik- 
ers solemnly  promised  full  protection  to  property  and 
life.  They  knew  that  our  men  surrendered  because 
the  wounded  required  attention  and  for  the  purpose  of 
saving  further  loss  of  life.  After  the  surrender  all  our 
men,  including  the  wounded  and  helpless,  were  brutally 
beaten  and  robbed  by  the  strikers,  and  the  leaders  made 
no  real  or  honest  effort  to  protect  them.  Our  men 
were  robbed  of  watches,  money,  clothing,  in  fact, 
everything,  and  then  mercilessly  clubbed  and  stoned. 
Conners,  unable  to  move  or  defend  himself,  was  delib- 
erately shot  by  one  of  the  strikers  and  then  clubbed. 
Edwards,  also  wounded  and  helpless,  was  clubbed  by 
another  striker  with  the  butt  end  of  a musket.  Both 
died,  and  subsequently  another  watchman  became  in- 
sane and  committed  suicide  as  a result  of  the  fearful 
beating  after  having  surrendered.  All  our  men  were 
more  or  less  injured.  The  acts  of  the  strikers,  after 
our  men  had  surrendered,  'would  be  a disgrace  to  sav- 
ages. Yet,  because  done  in  the  name  of  organized 
American  labor,  sympathy,  if  not  encouragement,  is 
shown  for  such  deeds  by  part  of  the  press  and  by  polit- 
ical demagogues. 

We  do  not  shirk  responsibility  for  any  of  our  acts  in 


this  or  any  other  strike.  The  coming  murder  triaib 
ought  to  bring  out  the  truth  and  uphold  the  law.  Our 
actions  will  then  be  shown  to  have  been  legal  from  be- 
ginning to  end.  Whatever  may  be  the  present  preju- 
dice against  our  agency,  we  shall  patiently  wait  the 
sober  reflection  of  the  country  in  the  confidence  that 
the  enormity  of  the  wrong  and  outrage  done  to  our 
men  at  Homestead  will  be  ultimately  recognized, 
although  the  example  will  in  the  meantime  have  caused 
incalculable  injury  to  the  community. 

The  principle  involved  is  of  far  more  importance 
than  are  the  merits  of  the  present  controversy  between 
the  Carnegie  Company  and  its  workmen.  We  have  no 
quarrel  with  organized  labor,  and  they  have  no  cause 
of  complaint  against  us  except  in  so  far  as  they  attempt 
to  destroy  property  and  life  and  to  violate  the  law.  If 
the  owners  of  mills,  factories,  mines,  railroads,  and  other 
valuable  property  cannot  employ  watchmen  to  protect 
life  and  property,  then  all  capital  so  invested  is  practi- 
cally at  the  mercy  of  secret  labor  organizations,  whose 
tyranny  and  despotism  exceed  anything  ever  known  in 
the  history  of  the  world.  These  societies  intimidate 
whole  communities  by  threats  of  murder,  and  are  deter- 
mined upon  ruin  and  destruction  of  property  if  their 
demands,  no  mattter  how  unreasonable  or  impractica- 
ble, are  not  complied  with. 

In  the  case  of  the  Mollie  Maguires,  they  terrorized 
the  public  authorities,  and  for  years  were  absolute  in 
their  rule  of  murder  and  destruction  of  property. 
Every  large  strike  has  shown  that  these  labor  organiza- 
tions will  murder  and  destroy  property  out  of  sheer 
wantonness  and  revenue.  During  the  Chicao-o  Stove 
Company’s  strike,  the  strikers  concealed  explosives  in  a 


45 

mould  in  order  to  cause  an  explosion  when  the  molten 
metal  was  poured  in.  During  the  strike  on  the  Chicago, 
Burlington  and  Quincy  Railroad,  dynamite  was  put 
under  trains  by  leaders  of  the  strike  in  the  expectation 
that  trains  would  be  blown  up  and  innocent  passengers 
killed.  During  the  recent  strike  on  the  New  York 
Central  obstructions  were  repeatedly  placed  on  the 
track  by  strikers,  and  in  one  instance  a train  of  sleeping 
cars,  filled  with  sleeping  passengers,  and  running  at  a 
high  rate  of  speed,  was  thrown  down  a steep  embank- 
ment. In  another  instance  during  the  same  strike,  the 
strikers  attempted  to  wreck  the  Chicago  express  going 
down  a steep  grade  into  West  Albany,  and  would  have 
succeeded  in  killing  or  maiming  a great  number  of  pas- 
sengers, if  one  of  the  railroad  ties,  with  which  the 
obstruction  was  made,  had  not  been  rotten.  In  the 
City  of  New  York,  during  the  stonecutters’  strike, 
strikers,  in  order  to  kill  non-union  men,  unwound  a part 
of  the  rope  of  a windlass  and  during  the  night  poured 
acid  on  the  rope  and  then  rewound  it  so  that  the  next 
day  non-union  men  might  be  killed  in  ascending  with 
the  stone  or  by  the  falling  stones.  These  fiendish  acts 
were  done  by  members  of  labor  organizations  in  the 
promotion  of  their  strikes,  and  the  only  grievance 
which  the  men  had  was  that  the  employer  was  seeking- 
to  hire  men  who  were  perfectly  willing  and  eager  to 
take  the  places  of  the  well-paid  strikers. 

These  are  but  a few  instances  where  strikers,  con- 
trolled by  secret  labor  orders,  have  sought  to  murder 
and  to  destroy  property.  It  was  morally  certain,  from 
the  threats  of  the  men  themselves,  that  the  strikers  at 
Homestead  would  resort  to  similar  violence  and  attempt 
to  destroy  the  property  of  the  Carnegie  Company  if 


46 


any  attempts  were  made  to  supply  their  places  by  non- 
union men.  At  the  present  time,  thousands  of  men 
would  go  to  Homestead,  attracted  by  the  high  wages 
paid  there,  if  they  were  assured  of  protection  in  the 
right  to  earn  their  living. 

The  business  of  watching  and  guarding  private 
property  is  now  extensively  carried  on  in  large  cities 
in  this  country,  not  only  by  ourselves,  but  by  many 
other  reputable  concerns.  Thousands  of  banks,  resi- 
dences, warehouses,  offices,  stores,  etc.,  are  thus  pro- 
tected and  guarded  by  private  watchmen.  If  men 
cannot  lawfully  act  as  private  watchmen  in  a large 
manufacturing  plant,  then  it  must  follow  that  the  bank 
or  the  private  house  or  office  cannot  be  protected  or 
guarded.  It  would,  we  think,  surprise  the  community 
if  it  should  be  declared  by  Congress  that  the  right  to 
protect  one’s  property  and  to  hire  servants  and  agents 
to  assist  in  so  doing  no  longer  exists  in  this  country. 

We  were  advised  by  our  counsel,  Messrs.  Seward, 
Guthrie  & Morawetz,  of  New  York,  that  we  were  not 
violating  any  Hav  of  the  United  States  or  of  the  State 
of  Pennsylvania  ; that  our  acts  were  lawful ; that  we 
had  the  right  to  employ  and  send  men  to  Homestead 
to  act  as  watchmen  ; that  if  they  were  attacked  they 
had  the  right  to  kill,  if  absolutely  necessary  for  self- 
defense  ; that  they  had  the  right  to  bear  arms  on  the 
premises  of  the  Carnegie  Company  in  order  to  protect 
life  and  private  property  whether  or  not  they  were  dep- 
utized by  the  sheriff  of  Allegheny  County  ; that  we  had 
the  right  to  ship  arms  from  Chicago  to  the  Carnegie 
yards  at  Homestead  for  the  purpose  of  arming  our  men 
if  and  after  they  were  deputized  by  the  sheriff ; that  in 
view  of  the  attack  on  the  barges  our  men  had  the  right 


47 


to  bear  arms  and  to  defend  themselves,  and  that  all 
their  acts  in  firing  in  self-defense  from  the  barges,  after 
the  attack  on  them,  were  legally  justifiable  under  the 
laws  of  the  United  States  and  of  the  State  of  Penn- 
sylvania. 

Yours,  respectfully, 

Wm.  A.  Pinkerton, 
Robert  A.  Pinkerton. 

At  this  point  the  committee  took  a recess  until  i p.m. 
after  the  recess. 

The  committee  met.  Present,  the  chairman,  Mr. 
Boatner,  Mr.  Bynum,  and  Mr.  Broderick. 

The  Chairman  : I will  state  for  the  information  of 

the  reporters  that,  as  we  began,  a committee  represent- 
ing the  Knights  of  Labor,  Mr.  John  Devlin,  Mr.  A.  W. 
Wright  and  Mr.  John  W.  Hayes,  presented  several 
questions  which  they  desired  the  committee  to  propound 
to  the  witness.  Under  our  rules  and  practice  we  do 
not  allow  any  parties  not  members  of  the  committee 
to  put  questions.  The  committee  examined  the  ques- 
tions and  have  submitted  them  to  the  witness  for  answer, 
and  the  witness  has  no  objection  to  answering  all  of 
them,  and  he  proposes  now  to  make  his  answers. 

The  chairman  then  proceeded  to  read  the  following 
questions,  and  the  witness  made  the  following  answers  : 

O.  State  the  names  and  residences  of  the  principals 
composing  the  so-called  Pinkerton  agency.  A.  Pinker- 
ton’s National  Detective  Agency  is  owned  and  con- 
ducted by  William  A.  Pinkerton,  of  Chicago,  and 
Robert  A.  Pinkerton,  of  New  York,  as  copartners,  and 


48 


as  survivors  and  successors  of  the  late  Allan  Pinker- 
ton. 

The  Chairman  : There  are  no  other  persons  mem- 
bers of  the  association  or  business  ? 

The  Witness  : Except  the  employees. 

The  Chairman  (reading)  : 

O.  State  the  number  and  location  of  the  offices, 
principal  and  subordinate,  of  the  agency.  A.  There 
are  two  principal  offices,  situated  respectively  at  New 
York  and  Chicago.  The  Chicago  office  is  under  the 
immediate  direction  and  control  of  William  A.  Pinker- 
ton, and  the  New  York  office  of  Robert  A.  Pinkerton. 
We  have  six  regular  branches  situated  in  Boston,  Phila- 
delphia, Kansas  City,  St.  Paul,  Denver,  and  Portland, 
Oregon. 

O.  What  is  the  nature  of  the  several  branches  or 
kinds  of  business  which  the  agencv  undertakes  to 
conduct  ? A.  The  nature  of  our  business  in  all  its 
branches  is  that  of  a general  private  detective  business. 
We  supply  watchmen  to  protect  and  guard  banks,  pri- 
vate residences,  offices,  stores,  warehouses,  etc.  \\  e 
also  supply  men  to  act  as  watchmen  for  race  tracks, 
summer  resorts,  fairs,  exhibitions,  theatres,  etc. 

O.  What  number  of  firearms  and  weapons  of  offense 
of  all  kinds  were  subject  to  your  control  or  owned  by 
your  agency  on  the  4th  day  of  July,  A. D.  1892,  and 
where  were  they  deposited  ? A.  Our  agency  owned 
about  two  hundred  and  fifty  rifles,  about  four  hundred 
pistols  and  about  an  equal  number  of  clubs,  and  they 
were  deposited  at  Chicago. 

0.  State  the  number  of  the  persons  regularly  in 
your  employ  on  the  said  4th  day  of  July,  or  formerly  ? 
A.  We  had  in  our  employ  at  that  time  not  to  exceed 


49 


boo  employees,  including-  clerks,  stenographers,  type- 
writers, etc.,  detectives,  night  and  day  watchmen,  600. 
To  the  best  of  my  knowledge  and  belief  we  have  never 
had  more  than  800  persons  in  our  employ  at  any  one 
time  at  all  the  offices  in  the  United  States. 

The  Chairman  : Would  it  be  practicable  for  you 
to  give  the  names  and  places  of  residence  of  these 
people  at  present  ? 

The  Witness:  Well,  it  would  not. 

Mr.  Boatner  : Do  you  think  it  would  be  well  to  load 
down  the  report  by  printing  the  names  and  addresses 
of  800  people  ? 

The  Chairman  : I do  not. 

Mr.  Boatner:  It  does  not  seem  to  me  to  be  relevant 
to  the  investigation.  You  might  inquire  as  to  the  class 
of  people  they  employ,  and  you  can  inquire  about  that 
without  requiring  him  to  give  their  names  and  resi- 
dences. 

Mr.  Bynum  : Could  we  get  about  the  number  em- 
ployed in  each  city? 

By  the  Chairman  : 

0.  Can  you  give  about  the  number  employed  in  each 
office?  A.  Well,  it  is  according  to  the  season.  We 
have  more  employees  in  the  summer  time  than  we  do 
in  the  winter  months,  and  I suppose  I could  give  an 
estimate  of  what  there  were  at  each  office 

O.  Just  give  that.  A.  Well,  at  the  present  time 
there  are  employed  in  New  York — there  may  be  from 
100  to  125  ; in  Boston,  20  to  25  ; in  Philadelphia,  pos- 
sibly 40  ; in  Chicago,  possibly  125  to  150;  in  Kansas 
City,  possibly  30;  in  Portland,  Oregon,  possibly  15; 
in  Denver,  possibly  30 ; and  in  St.  Paul,  possibly  20. 


50 


The  Chairman  (reading)  : 

Q.  What  authority  do  you  exercise,  or  claim  to  ex- 
ercise, over  your  employees  as  to  obedience  of  orders  ? 
Are  they  required  to  bear  arms  and  go  wherever  ordered 
by  the  principals  of  the  agency,  and  perform  whatever 
service  is  imposed  upon  them?  A.  The  only  authority 
we  ever  exercised,  or  claim  to  exercise,  is  that  of  any 
employer  exacting  obedience,  attention  to  duty,  honesty 
and  sobriety.  They  are  not  required  to  bear  arms  or 
to  perform  whatever  service  is  imposed  upon  them. 
They  are  always  advised  of  exactly  what  they  are  ex- 
pected to  do,  and  are  at  perfect  liberty  to  refuse  any 
employment  to  which  they  object. 

Q.  Are  any  of  your  contracts  with  your  employees 
in  writing?  If  yea,  produce  one  or  more  of  them? 
A.  Our  contracts  with  many  of  our  employees  are  in 
writing.  They  provide  for  honesty,  sobriety  and  atten- 
tion to  the  duties  for  which  they  are  employed.  W e 
decline,  under  advice  of  counsel,  to  produce  these  con- 
tracts, because  they  are  matters  of  private  agreement 
between  ourselves  and  our  employees. 

Mr.  Boatner  : I desire  to  enter  my  protest  against 
any  such  style  of  proceeding  as  to  propound  these 
questions  at  the  beginning  of  the  examination  of  this 
witness.  It  appears  to  me  it  is  an  usurpation  of  the 
powers  of  this  committee.  It  is  a reflection  upon  the 
committee  in  that  it  takes  for  granted  that  the  com- 
mittee will  not  make  a proper  investigation.  The  very 
purpose  for  which  we  summoned  Mr.  Pinkerton  is  to 
investigate  the  participation  of  the  Pinkerton  Company 
with  the  late  riots  and  disturbances  at  Homestead,  and 
I do  not  like  to  be  put  in  the  position  of  having  a 
reflection  thrown  upon  us  that  we  would  not  ask  the 


proper  questions.  If  I had  been  present  this  morning, 
I would  have  opposed  these  questions  coming  in  at  this 
time.  After  we  had  examined  the  witness,  then,  if 
there  were  any  questions  which  they  desired  to  have 
put  not  covered  by  our  examination,  the  questions  could 
have  been  asked. 

The  question  was  discussed  by  the  committee  and  it 
was  decided,  as  the  examination  had  been  begun  in  this 
manner,  it  would  be  continued  and  the  balance  of  the 
questions  put. 

The  Chairman  (reading)  : 

O.  State  under  what  circumstances  you  entered  into 
the  agreement  with  Mr,  Frick,  or  his  associates,  to 
guard  the  works  at  Homestead,  Pa.  Who  first  broached 
the  negotiation  ending  in  the  employment  ? Produce 
all  correspondence  relating  thereto.  A.  We  were  re- 
quested by  the  Carnegie  Steel  Company,  Limited,  to 
furnish  about  300  watchmen  to  protect  the  property  of 
the  company  at  Homestead  and  the  lives  of  their 
employees.  The  negotiations  were  first  broached  by 
the  company’s  representative.  The  correspondence 
relating  thereto  is  not  in  my  possession  here. 

0.  Was  this  your  first  agreement  to  supply  men  to 
Mr.  Frick  or  his  associates?  How  many  men  and  on 
what  terms  did  you  supply  them  in  the  matter  of  the 
difficulty  in  the  Connellsville  coke  regions  ? 

The  Chairman  : You  may  answer  that  or  not,  as 
that  is  something  we  are  not  charged  with  inquiring 
into.  A.  Our  firm  had  been  previously  engaged  by 
Mr.  Frick,  or  the  Coke  Company  with  which  he  was 
connected  in  Pennsylvania.  During  the  coke  strike  we 
supplied  between  150  and  200  watchmen,  as  nearly  as 
I can  now  recollect,  and  the  terms  were  $5  per  day. 


52 


These  men  were  ultimately  all  sworn  in  as  sheriffs  depu- 
ties, and  some  of  them  were  given  State  commissions 
under  the  Pennsylvania  Coal  and  Iron  Police  Law. 

The  Chairman  (reading): 

O.  How  many  men  were  you  requested  to  furnish  in 
the  Homestead  matter;  within  what  time,  and  from 
what  localities  did  you  obtain  them  ? A.  We  were  re- 
quested to  furnish  about  300  watchmen  ; they  were  to 
be  supplied  by  the  6th  of  July  ; we  had  about  ten  days’ 
notice,  and  the  men  were  obtained  from  Chicago,  Phil- 
adelphia and  New  York.  All  these  men  knew  exactly 
the  nature  of  their  employment,  and  many  of  them  had 
been  for  some  time  regularly  in  our  employ.  All  of 
these  men  had  recommendations  as  to  their  character 
and  antecedents,  or  were  personally  known  to  us. 
Their  references  are  always  investigated,  and  we  use 
the  utmost  care  in  selecting  as  reliable  and  trustworthy 
men  as  possible. 

O.  How  were  the  barges  on  which  your  men  were 
transported  to  Homestead  constructed  as  to  the  de- 
fense and  protection  of  persons  upon  them  ? A.  I do 
not  personally  know  anything  about  the  barges,  but  so 
far  as  my  firm  are  concerned  the  barges  were  not  con- 
structed for  the  purpose  of  defense  and  protection. 
They  were  simply  ordinary  barges,  used  for  transporta- 
tion. 

O.  Were  not  the  barq-es  lined  with  iron  or  steel 
plates  of  sufficient  strength  to  resist  small  arms  of  even- 
kind  ? A.  I am  informed  and  verily  believe  that  the 
barges  were  not  lined  with  iron  or  steel,  and  were  not 
of  sufficient  strength  to  resist  small  arms. 

0.  Were  not  the  men  on  the  barges  entirely  secure 
from  any  attack  from  the  union  men  of  Homestead,  so 


53 


long  as  they  remained  behind  the  protecting  sides  of 
the  barges?  A.  To  the  best  of  my  knowledge  and 
belief  the  barges  were  not  secure  from  attack,  and  the 
Sfreat  amount  of  wounds  indicted  on  our  men  should 

o 

conclusively  establish  that  they  were  not  a sufficient 
protection.  We  would  never  have  allowed  our  men  to 
start  on  the  expedition  had  we  known  they  were  going 
to  be  attacked  before  landing. 

Q.  Why  were  barges  employed  to  transport  the  men 
from  Pittsburg  to  Homestead  instead  of  the  ordinary 
modes  and  means  of  travel  by  land  and  water  ? A. 
Barges  were  employed  instead  of  the  railroads,  because 
the  Carnegie  Company  and  ourselves  expected  that 
thereby  our  watchmen  would  be  enabled  to  land  upon 
the  company’s  property  without  causing  any  breach  of 
the  peace  or  tending  to  excite  the  men  who  had  gone 
on  strike.  The  landing  was  made  at  night,  and  at  an 
hour  when  we  expected  the  strikers  would  be  in  bed, 
because  we  believed  that  after  the  experience  of  the 
sheriff’s  men  an  attempt  might  be  made  to  forcibly 
prevent  our  men  entering  the  works  if  we  came  by  rail- 
road in  the  daytime.  Our  sole  desire  was  to  avoid  by 
all  means  a breach  of  the  peace  and  inciting  or  aggra- 
vating a riot.  Had  we  known,  when  the  men  started, 
that  they  could  not  land  without  a breach  of  the  peace, 
we  should  have  refused  to  permit  them  to  go  unless 
authorized  by  the  Governor  of  the  State  or  deputized 
by  the  sheriff. 

0.  State  the  number  of  men  on  the  barges,  the 
amount  of  fixed  ammunition,  and  the  number  and  kind 
of  firearms  of  all  kinds,  and  by  whom  the  said  ammuni- 
tion and  arms  were  supplied  ? A.  There  were  about 
310  men  on  the  barges.  There  were  about  250  rifles, 


54 


about  300  pistols,  and  ammunition  and  night  clubs. 
The  clubs  are  what  are  usually  known  as  watchmen’s 
sticks  or  police  batons. 

0.  How  many  of  the  men  on  the  barges  were  old 
and  trained  employees  of  your  agency  ? What  authority 
had  they  over  the  recruits  in  respect  to  requiring  them 
to  bear  and  use  firearms  at  their  command  and  direc- 
tion ? A.  About  two-thirds  of  the  men  had  previously 
been  in  our  employ.  They  had  no  authority  over  the 
other  men  in  any  way,  and  could  not  have  given  them 
any  orders  in  respect  of  bearing  or  using  firearms.  All 
the  men  were  under  the  charge  of  F.  H.  Hinde,  who 
had  been  in  our  employ  for  many  years,  and  whom  we 
knew  to  be  trustworthy,  prudent  and  reliable  in  every 
way. 

O.  State  with  particularity  where  the  men  who  were 
finally  taken  to  Homestead  were  assembled  together, 
through  what  States,  and  by  what  lines  of  railroad 
they  were  transported  to  Pittsburg?  A.  About  120 
men  were  sent  from  Chicago  ; they  passed  through 
Illinois,  Indiana  and  Ohio.  About  76  men  were  sent 
from  Philadelphia,  passing  through  New  Jersey,  New 
York  and  Ohio.  About  120  men  were  sent  from  New 
York,  passing  through  New  York,  Ohio  and  Pennsyl- 
vania. All  the  men  met  at  Ashtabula,  Ohio,  and  went 
from  there  to  a point  near  Youngstown,  Ohio,  where 
they  were  put  aboard  the  barges.  The  Chicago  men 
left  by  the  Lake  Shore  Road  ; the  New  York  men 
went  over  the  West  Shore  Road  and  the  Lake  Shore  ; 
the  Philadelphia  men  went  over  the  Pennsylvania 
Road,  the  Lake  Shore  and  the  West  Shore. 

O.  State  precisely  the  object  in  placing  the  large 
number  of  firearms  on  the  barges,  and  whether  it  was 


55 


not  understood  between  the  principals  of  the  agency 
and  Mr.  Frick  and  others  representing  the  Carnegie 
Works  at  Homestead,  that  the  men  on  the  barges  were 
to  commit  a breach  of  the  peace,  or  to  use  force  to  re- 
cover possession  of  these  works  if  necessary?  A.  The 
arms  placed  aboard  the  barges  were  in  boxes  and  were 
destined  for  the  yards  and  private  property  of  the 
Carnegie  Company.  Our  positive  instructions  were 
that  they  should  not  be  used  or  distributed  to  the  men 
until  after  they  had  been  sworn  in  by  the  sheriff,  and 
we  were  assured  that  the  sheriff  had  promised  to  swear 
them  in  upon  the  first  sign  of  trouble  or  disturbance. 
Our  men  were  not,  under  any  circumstances,  to  com- 
mit a breach  of  the  peace,  and  there  never  was  any 
such  understanding,  directly  or  indirectly,  with  any 
one  connected  with  the  Carnegie  Company  or  with 
anybody  else.  We  would  not  permit  them  to  use  force 
to  recover  possession  of  the  works  if  they  had  been  in 
possession  of  the  strikers,  unless  they  had  been  duly 
authorized  and  sworn  in  by  the  sheriff.  Our  only  pur- 
pose was  to  go  upon  private  property  and  then  protect 
it  from  attack. 

O.  State  whether  it  was  not  the  intention  of  the 
superior  officers  on  the  barges,  and  whether  they  had 
not  been  instructed  to  fire  on  the  so-called  lockecl-out 
union  workmen  at  Homestead,  and  to  take  life  if  it 
were  necessary,  to  obtain  possession  of  these  works  ? 
A.  They  were  not  so  instructed,  and  would  not  have 
fired  upon  the  locked-out  men  except  as  a matter  of 
self-defense  after  they  had  been  attacked  and  six  of 
their  number  shot  down. 

Q.  Did  you  know  that  it  was  your  duty  to  first 
apply  to  the  Courts  for  assistance  and  secure  the  usual 


56 


process  and  writs  before  you  were  authorized  to  employ 
force  to  reach  the  Carnegie  steel  and  iron  works  at 
Homestead  ? A.  We  understood  that  our  employers, 
the  Carnegie  Company,  had  duly  applied  to  the  proper 
legal  authority,  and  that  we  were  going  to  Homestead 
with  the  consent  and  approval  of  the  sheriff,  and  our 
watchmen  would  be  sworn  in  in  case  of  any  outbreak. 

O.  What  right  did  you  believe,  you  had  to  assemble 
men  at  various  places  outside  of  the  State  of  Pennsyl- 
vania, and  to  carry  them  within  that  State  armed  or 
with  stores  of  arms  conveniently  at  hand,  without  the 
request  or  consent  of  the  authorities  of  the  Common- 
wealth of  Pennsylvania,  or  of  any  municipality  therein  ? 

A.  We  were  advised  by  counsel  that  we  had  a perfect 
right  to  send  watchmen  from  one  State  to  another.  We 
did  not  attempt  and  have  never  attempted  to  send  any 
armed  body,  and  the  arms  on  the  barges  would  not 
have  been  distributed  if  the  men  had  not  been  attacked. 
There  was  every  reason  to  believe  from  the  threats 
from  the  strikers  themselves  that  our  men  would  be  * 
attacked,  and  that  attempts  would  be  made  to  destroy 
the  property  of  the  Carnegie  Company.  The  principal 
deputy  of  the  Sheriff  of  Allegheny  County,  Mr.  Gray, 
accompanied  our  men,  and  we  distinctly  understood 
that  he  would  be  authorized  and  prepared  to  swear  our 
men  in  as  soon  as  there  was  any  outbreak  or  indication 
of  trouble. 

O.  Did  your  agency,  before  taking  armed  men  into 
Pennsylvania,  make  any  effort  to  obtain  the  consent  or 
authority  of  the  executive  of  the  Commonwealth  of 
Pennsylvania ; or  did  you  ever,  upon  any  occasion 
before  taking  armed  men  into  any  State  or  common- 
wealth, ask  for  or  obtain  the  consent  or  authority  of 


57 


the  executive  of  such  State  or  commonwealth  ? A. 
This  question  is  a matter  of  law,  and  it  would  be  a 
waste  of  time  for  us  to  attempt  to  instruct  the  com- 
mittee. 

Q.  Would  you  not  have  the  same  authority  or  legal 
right  to  place  10,000  armored  barges  on  the  navigable 
waters  of  the  United  States,  equipped  with  men  and 
loaded  with  arms  and  ammunition,  that  you  had  to 
place  these  barges  so  manned  and  loaded  upon  the 
waters  of  the  Monongahela  River  ? A.  This  question 
is  a matter  of  law,  and  it  would  be  a waste  of  time  for 
us  to  attempt  to  instruct  the  committee. 

Q.  How  many  human  lives  have  your  employees 
taken  since  your  agency  first  entered  upon  the  busi- 
ness of  supplying  men  to  protect  the  property  of  cor- 
porations and  employers  against  so-called  “strikers,” 
or  to  make  effective  so-called  “ lockouts  ?”  A.  During 
the  twenty  years  that  we  have  been  engaged  in  this 
strike  work,  not  a single  instance  can  be  cited  where 
our  men  have  fired  upon  the  strikers  except  as  a last 
extremity  in  order  to  save  their  lives.  During  these 
twenty  years  three  men  have  been  killed  by  our  watch- 
men in  these  strikes,  up  to  the  time  of  the  Homestead 
affair.  In  each  instance  our  men  were  sworn  in  as 
deputy  sheriffs  or  peace  officers,  and  whenever  tried 
have  been  acquitted. 

By  the  Chairman  : 

Q.  As  I understand  you,  you  are  engaged  in  the  reg- 
ular detective  business,  and  in  addition  to  that  furnish 
guards  to  corporations  and  others  who  desire  to  employ 
them  to  guard  property  in  case  of  strikes,  disturbances, 
&c.  ? A.  We  are  engaged  in  the  general  detective 


58 


business.  The  watch  business  is  a separate  business, 
but  controlled  by  ourselves,  and  we  furnish  watchmen 
for  private  parties  or  corporations. 

O.  Will  you  mention  the  number  of  strikes  or  dis- 
turbances between  corporations  engaged  in  the  trans- 
portation of  interstate  commerce  or  carrying  the  United 
States  mails  and  their  employees  wherein  you  have  in- 
terposed and  furnished  men  as  detectives  or  as  guards 
to  such  corporations  and  their  property  ? A.  I cannot 
state  the  exact  number  of  railroads,  corporations  or 
individuals  we  have  been  employed  by  or  furnished  with 
watchmen  in  the  twenty  years  since  we  commenced  it. 

O.  State  the  principal  ones  within  your  recollection, 
and  give  the  committee  an  account  of  the  character  of 
them  ? A.  The  ones  that  I recollect  are  the  Chicago, 
Burlington  and  Quincy;  the  Lake  Shore 

Q.  When  did  that  occur — take  them  one  at  a time  ? 
A.  I cannot  give  the  date. 

O.  What  year?  A.  I cannot  give  you  the  year.  It 
was  about  four  years  ago  ; that  was  the  Burlington 
strike.  The  Lake  Shore  Road  was  about  five  years 
ago,  and  the  New  York  Central  Road  about  two  years 
ago.  There  have  been  other  roads,  but  I do  not  call 
them  to  mind.  There  was  the  Union  Pacific  seven  or 
eight  years  ago. 

Q.  You  furnished  men,  did  you  not,  at  a strike,  or  a 
series  of  strikes,  occurring,  I believe,  in  1886  and  1887, 
out  west  ; that  is,  west  of  the  Mississippi  River  ? A. 
West  of  the  Mississippi  ? 

Q.  Yes  ; it  was  investigated  by  a committee  of  Con- 
gress ? A.  I do  not  call  it  to  mind ; I do  not  know  of 
any  investigating  committee  who  investigated  any  strike 
which  we  were  engaged  in. 


59 


O.  Have  any  of  your  men  ever  been  indicted  or  tried 
for  killing  or  wounding  any  people  while  engaged  in 
the  duties  which  you  employed  them  to  perform  ? A. 
Yes,  sir. 

O.  Will  you  state  the  cases  and  the  results?  A.  In 
the  strike — there  is  another  road  I had  forgotten,  and 
that  is  the  Delaware,  Lackawanna  and  Western — there 
were  several  arrested,  one  for  shooting,  who  was  tried 
and  acquitted.  At  the  stock-yard  strike  in  Chicago, 
there  were  two  or  three  arrested,  tried  and  acquitted. 
In  a number  of  strikes  there  have  been  parties  arrested 
on  charge  of  assault.  None  have  been  convicted,  ex- 
cept two  before  a magistrate  or  justice  of  the  peace, 
and  the  judgments  have  been  reversed. 

O.  What  cases  are  they  ? A.  That  was  on  a strike 
on  the  New  York  Central  Road. 

O.  What  year  ? A.  Two  years  ago. 

Q.  What  was  the  charge  against  the  men,  or  how 
many  charges  ? A.  Simply  assault.  Some  were  acquit- 
ted. Those  who  were  taken  into  the  higher  courts 
were  acquitted,  but  some  being  tried  by  local  magis- 
trates, the  men  were  committed  for  trial,  but  never  were 
tried  ; that  was  the  result  of  that,  or  if  tried,  were  ac- 
quitted. 

O.  Have  you  ever  furnished  guards  to  travel  on 
trains  which  were  engaged  in  the  transportation  of  in- 
terstate commerce  and  the  United  States  mails  be- 
tween different  States?  A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  In  what  cases  ? A.  In  the  cases  of  the  Burling- 
ton strike  and  the  New  York  Central  strike.  I think, 
wherever  we  have  done  strike  work  for  railroads,  at  the 
time  we  furnish  men  to  ride  the  trains. 


60 


0.  Do  these  men  go  armed?  A.  I should  think 
they  did  ; I do  not  know  positively. 

O.  What  were  your  instructions  in  such  cases?  A. 
It  was  all  owing  to  the  circumstances.  In  the  New 
York  Central  strike  the  men  who  rode  freight  trains 
were  armed.  They  were  obliged  to  protect  themselves 
from  parties  shooting  out  of  buildings  at  them  and 
throwing  stones  from  an  elevation  down  on  the  com- 
pany’s employees  or  on  themselves.  In  the  New  York 
strike  a number  of  men  were  knocked  off  freight  trains, 
off  trains  while  in  motion,  by  stones,  and  some  were 
shot. 

O.  About  what  number  would  be  furnished  for  a 
train  ? A.  It  would  be  according  to  the  length  of  the 
freight  train.  I suppose  that  one  man  would  probably 
cover  five  cars — five,  six  or  seven  cars.  There  would 
be  a man,  anyhow,  to  every  brakesman  on  the  train,  and 
one  in  the  caboose,  and  probably  one  riding  with  the 
engineer. 

0.  Can  you  give  the  date ? A.  (Continuing.!  I 

will  say  these  men  were  sworn  in,  all  of  them,  as  peace 
officers. 

O.  Can  you  give  the  date  of  the  negotiations  between 
you  and  Mr.  Frick,  chairman  of  the  Carnegie  Steel 
Company,  at  Homestead,  with  reference  to  furnishing 
men  who  were  sent  there  subsequently ; I mean  the 
men  who  were  sent  to  Homestead  and  got  into  trouble 
on  the  morning  of  the  6th  of  July?  A.  Yes,  sir;  I 
think  the  negotiations  commenced  eight  or  ten  davs 
previous  to  that. 

O.  Some  eight  or  ten  days  previous  to  that  ? A. 
Yes,  sir. 

O.  With  whom  did  you  negotiate  ? A.  My  negotiations 


61 


were  conducted  through  Mr.  Schoonmaker,  who  was  in 
consultation  with  Mr.  Frick;  he  is  the  vice — I think 
the  assistant  to  the  president  of  the  Carnegie  Steel 
Company. 

O.  Mr.  Frick  testified  that  he  contracted  to  pay  you 
$5  a day  per  man  and  feed  them — board  them  ; was 
that  the  contract?  A.  Yes,  sir. 

O.  How  many  did  you  say  were  furnished?  A.  I 
say  310.  There  may  have  been  312  or  315,  along 
there.  I say  under  316  men  limit. 

O.  Who  had  charge  of  these  men  ; did  you  not  have 
some  one  who  controlled  their  action  and  directed 
them  ? A.  Yes,  sir ; F.  H.  Hinde,  an  employee  of 
ours  at  New  York,  was  to  be  in  charge  of  the  men. 

Q.  Did  he  go  in  charge  of  them  ? A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  became  of  him  ? A.  He  was  shot  down  in 
attempting  to  land  at  Homestead. 

Q.  Did  he  recover?  A.  He  is  still  in  the  hospital 
at  Pittsburg  ; he  was  shot  twice. 

0.  You  have  no  personal  knowledge  of  the  barges 
or  of  any  transaction  which  occurred  in  taking  the  barges 
up  the  river,  and  in  the  landing  or  attempted  landing  at 
Homestead?  A.  Nothing  except  from  the  reports 
which  have  been  made  to  me. 

0.  You  have  no  personal  knowledge?  A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Have  your  men,  while  in  the  employ  of  railroads 
and  on  trains  running  through  the  country,  ever  been 
engaged  in  any  fight  or  battle  with  other  people  other 
than  you  have  stated,  that  in  some  instances  they  were 
fired  upon  by  unknown  parties  and  had  stones  thrown 
at  them  ? A.  Well,  we  have  a good  deal  of  work,  and 
I guess  we  do  most  of  what  they  call  train-robbery 
work — where  trains  are  robbed  by  train  robbers.  We 


62 


work  for  all  express  companies,  and  where  there  is  a 
robbery  we  go  out — and  in  this  case,  in  speaking  of  men 
who  have  been  killed  by  our  men,  I leave  the  train  rob- 
beries outside.  I mentioned  three  men  who  have  been 
killed  in  connection  with  strikes,  but  I did  not  mention 
the  men  killed  while  being  arrested  for  holding  up  trains 
and  who  resisted  arrest. 

O.  Do  you  know  how  many  people  of  that  character, 
train  robbers,  have  been  killed  by  your  men  ? A.  No, 
sir  ; I would  have  to  look  up  the  papers  to  see  it.  I 
think  there  were  in  1866,  at  the  time  of  the  Adams  Ex- 
press robbery  at  Seymour,  Ind.,  two  or  three  killed 
while  attempting  to  rob  the  train. 

Q.  By  your  men  who  were  on  the  train?  A.  Well, 
there  were  a number  of  our  men  on  the  train,  and  there 
were  others  on  the  train,  and  it  was  done  at  the  night- 
time, and  whether  they  were  killed  by  our  men  or  not 
I could  not  say. 

Mr.  Bynum  : Those  who  were  not  killed  were  hung- 
to  a limb  of  a tree  on  the  ed^e  of  Sevmour  the  morning- 
afterwards. 

The  Witness:  Yes,  sir;  there  were  a number  hung 
out  there.  In  replying  further  to  the  question,  I desire 
to  state  that  at  any  time  we  have  ever  had  trouble  in 
connection  with  strike  work  on  railroads,  it  has  always 
been  where  it  has  been  brought  on  by  the  strikers  or 
their  friends,  and  in  riding  trains,  where  strikers  have 
come  out  and  put  obstructions  on  the  track  to  stop 
trains  from  moving,  and  take  possession  of  freight  yards 
and  driven  off  switchmen,  our  duties  have  always  been 
to  put  the  trains  in  motion  and  to  clear  the  yards  of 
strikers  and  allow  the  trains  to  move  ; never  to  stop  a 
train  or  obstruct  it. 


63 


By  the  Chairman  : 

Q.  Have  your  employees  in  any  case  within  your 
knowledge  fired  upon  or  made  an  assault  upon  any 
citizen  of  the  United  States  or  other  people  while  in 
the  discharge  of  these  duties  or  in  the  employ  of  corpo- 
rations ; have  they  ever  made  any  assault  upon  them  or 
begun  any  riot,  or  shot,  or  abused  them  ? A.  Not  be- 
gun it.  They  have  fired  when  they  have  been  fired  at  ; 
when  they  thought  their  lives  were  in  danger. 

O.  Is  it  not  a habit  of  your  men  while  thus  employed 
to  go  armed?  A.  Well,  where  they  have  been  sworn 
in  as  peace  officers,  yes,  sir  ; and  where  they  have  been 
actually  on  the  road,  protecting  the  property  and  the 
lives  of  employees,  or  traveling  through  the  country  ; 
but  traveling  through  the  country  like  transporting  the 
men  from  Chicago  or  New  York  or  Philadelphia  to  the 
Carnegie  works,  they  did  not  carry  arms.  The  arms 
are  sent,  and  they  are  generally  put  on  the  company’s 
property,  and  are  not  used  except  where  some  necessity 
arises  to  use  them.  W e do  not  carry  armed  guards 
through  the  country. 

By  Mr.  Boatner  : 

O.  You  have  charge  of  the  New  York  office,  I be- 
lieve ? A.  I have  charge  of  what  we  call  the  eastern 
division — New  York,  Boston  and  Philadelphia. 

O.  Mr.  Frick  put  in  evidence  a letter,  I think,  of  your 
agency,  dated  on  the  25th  day  of  June,  in  which  he 
made  formal  application  to  be  supplied  with  men.  Was 
there  any  agreement  between  your  agency  and  Mr. 
Frick  prior  to  that  time  that  men  should  be  furnished  ? 
A.  I do  not  believe  there  was  an  agreement  at  that 
time.  I had  declined  to  furnish  men  unless  they  could 


64 


be  sworn  in.  I had  positively  declined  to  furnish  them 
unless  that  should  be  done. 

O.  Mr.  Frick  testified  that  several  days  before  the 
25th  a representative  of  your  agency  came  from  Phila- 
delphia and  had  an  interview  with  him  in  regard  to 
these  men  ; that  your  representative  had  stated  the 
terms  upon  which  they  would  be  furnished,  and  that  he 
had  accepted  the  terms  by  making  no  objection  ? A.  I 
said  that  to  the  best  of  my  recollection  it  was  eight  or 
ten  days  before  that  consultations  had  been  going  on. 
I now  remember  that  Mr.  Hinde  was  sent  on  from  New 
York,  at  the  request  of  either  Mr.  Frick  or  his  repre- 
sentative, to  come  to  Pittsburg  for  the  purpose  of  an 
interview. 

0.  What  I want  to  get  at  is  the  date  when  Mr.  Hinde 
went  to  Pittsburg?  A.  What  was  the  date  of  Mr. 
Frick’s  letter  ? 

0.  Mr.  Frick’s  letter  was  dated  the  25th  of  fune. 
He  said  Mr.  Hinde  had  been  there  prior  to  that,  but 
we  could  not  get  out  of  him  just  how  long  prior  to  that. 
A.  I could  not  state  now  ; it  may  have  been  four,  five 
or  six  days  prior,  but  there  was  no  understanding  at 
that  time  that  our  men  were  to  be  employed.  The  un- 
derstanding; was  that  in  case  circumstances  arose  which 
warranted  it,  they  would  be  employed.  Terms  were 
mentioned,  no  doubt,  but  there  was  no  understanding 
they  were  to  come  in  and  go  to  work  at  that  time.  It 
was  simply  a general  conversation  that  in  case  the  men 
were  to  be  employed  that  a man  had  been  on  the  ground 
and  looked  it  over,  and  it  was  for  consultation  only 
that  Mr.  Hinde  went  to  Pittsburg. 

O.  Had  Mr.  Hinde  returned  to  New  York  before 


65 


the  25th?  A.  Oh,  yes,  sir.  He  went  away  with  these 
men  when  they  left. 

0.  He  went  away  with  the  men  ? A.  Yes,  sir. 

0.  When  he  returned  to  New  York  you  received 
this  letter,  which  was  dated  on  the  25th  of  June,  and 
that  was  after  he  had  had  an  interview  with  Mr.  Frick? 
A.  Yes,  sir;  my  recollection  is  that  that  is  what  led  up 
to  the  letter.  I declined  to  furnish  the  men  unless  they 
could  be  sworn  in.  After  Mr  Hinde’s  return  I declined 
to  furnish  the  men  unless  they  could  be  sworn  in. 

The  Chairman  : As  deputy  sheriffs  ? 

The  Witness  : As  peace  officers  or  deputy  sheriffs. 

By  Mr.  Boatner  : 

O.  Did  you  reply  to  Mr.  Frick’s  letter  of  the  25th  of 
June?  A.  My  recollection  is  I did,  but  most  of  our  ne- 
gotiations were  done  through  Mr.  Schoonmaker  through 
the  telephone  or  over  their  private  wire.  Mr.  Schoon- 
maker would  come  to  me  and  then  he  would  go  back, 
and  whether  he  would  telephone  or  use  the  private  wire 
I could  not  say. 

0.  I would  like  for  you  to  be  certain,  if  you  can, 
whether  you  did  reply  to  this  letter  of  the  25th  of  June? 
A.  I think  it  is  very  likely. 

O.  Well,  that  still  leaves  it  in  a condition  of  uncer- 
tainty? A.  I do  not  think  there  is  much  doubt  about 
it  myself ; I believe  I did  ; that  is  all  I can  say. 

0.  Do  you  recollect  having  written  the  letter  or 
dictated  it  yourself?  A.  I did  not  write  it  myself;  if  I 
did  send  one  I dictated  it. 

O.  Do  you  recollect  having  dictated  it?  A.  I have 
a recollection  I did.  My  recollection  is  I did. 

0.  Do  you  recollect  the  substance  of  the  letter?  A. 


66 


Well,  I can  only  say  I think  it  applied  to  the  swearing 
in  of  the  men ; that  if  we  furnished  the  men  they  must 
be  sworn  in. 

Q.  Could  you  furnish  us  with  a press  copy  of  that 
letter?  A.  I could  furnish  you  with  a copy  of  that  let- 
ter if  it  was  necessary. 

0.  We  would  like  to  have  it.  Mr.  Frick  has  furnished 
us  with  a letter  to  you,  and  we  would  be  very  glad  to 
have  a copy  of  your  reply.  Now,  it  was  testified  to  by 
the  captain  of  the  boat  who  took  those  men  to  Home- 
stead that  the  arms  were  turned  over  to  him,  with  the 
supplies,  and  that  they  were  delivered  to  him  in  ordinary 
boxes,  which  did  not  show  what  they  contained.  Will 
you  state  to  the  committee  who  sent  those  arms  to  the 
City  of  Pittsburg?  A.  We  sent  them. 

O.  From  what  point  ? A.  From  Chicago. 

Q.  To  whose  care  did  you  ship  them  at  Pittsburg? 
A.  To  the  Union  Supply  Company. 

Q.  Did  you  give  the  Union  Supply  Company  instruc- 
tions as  to  the  disposition  to  be  made  of  the  arms?  A. 
No,  sir. 

Q.  You  gave  them  no  instructions?  A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  How  did  the  Union  Supply  Company  come  to 
deliver  them  to  the  captain  of  this  boat  ? A.  I have 
no  personal  knowledge  how  it  was,  but  I could  assume 
how  it  was  done. 

O.  How  would  you  assume  it  was  done  ? A.  I assume 
they  got  instructions  from  the  Carnegie  people — from 
some  one  of  them. 

O.  Had  you  given  the  Union  Supply  Company  in- 
structions to  act  on  the  orders  of  the  CameHe  Steel 

o 

Company?  A.  No,  sir. 

O.  How  do  you  account  for  the  fact  that  the  Supply 


67 


Company  accepted  instructions  from  the  Carnegie  Steel 
Company  about  your  property?  A.  I do  not  know 
they  accepted  instructions.  I assume  that  they  did, 
but  I cannot  account  for  why  they  were  delivered 
there. 

The  Chairman  : Mr.  Boatner,  I think  there  is  some- 
thing in  the  testimony  taken  out  there  that  Mr.  Frick 
or  some  of  those  people  are  members  of  the  Union  Sup- 
ply Company. 

By  Mr.  Boatner: 

O.  What  sort  of  an  organization  is  the  Union  Sup- 
ply Company — what  business  does  it  do  ? A.  I do  not 
know. 

O.  You  do  not  know?  A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  At  whose  suggestion  did  you  send  those  arms  and 
ammunition  to  the  Union  Supply  Company?  A.  The 
instructions  came  from  the  Carnegie  people. 

O.  And  you  merely  obeyed  their  instructions  in  re- 
gard to  the  shipment  of  their  arms?  A.  Yes,  sir;  that 
is,  to  ship  anything  we  had  to  ship. 

O.  You  have  testified  at  considerable  length  about 
the  object  of  having  these  arms  on  board;  under  what 
contingencies  were  these  arms  to  be  used?  A.  In  case 
that  their  lives — we  positively  instructed  the  men  and 
officers  that  the  arms  were  not  to  be  used  except  they 
were  sworn  in  by  the  sheriff  and  their  lives  were  in 
danger.  I desire  to  say  that  I did  not  know  that  the 
arms  were  to  go  up  on  the  boat,  but  I have  understood 
that  the  reason  they  were  sent  up  on  the  boat  was,  it 
was  impossible  to  get  anything  inside  of  the  works 
otherwise.  I had  nothing  to  do  with  putting  the  arms 
on  the  boat. 


68 


Q.  Then,  as  I understand,  your  instructions  were  that 
the  men,  in  the  event  resistance  was  made  to  their  land- 
ing, should  not  use  the  arms  unless  their  lives  were  in 
danger?  A.  Or  unless  they  were  sworn  in,  and  then 
only  when  their  lives  were  in  danger. 

O.  They  were  not  to  use  the  arms  unless  they  were 
sworn  in  and  their  lives  were  also  in  danger?  A.  Yes, 
sir ; unless  their  lives  also  were  in  danger. 

O.  Do  you  mean  if  they  had  been  attacked  and  their 
lives  were  threatened  before  they  were  sworn  in,  that 
they  had  no  right  to  protect  themselves  ? A.  Not  with 
arms. 

Q.  Even  if  they  were  attacked  with  arms?  A.  If 
they  were  attacked  with  arms,  and  the  men’s  lives  were 
in  danger,  they  were  to  protect  themselves. 

O.  Were  not  arms  furnished?  A.  They  were  to 
protect  themselves  ; those  were  the  instructions  to  the 
men. 

O.  But  they  were  provided  with  those  arms  ? A. 
They  were  not;  the  arms  were  sent  up  to  be  put  inside 
the  Homestead  works. 

Q.  But  the  evidence  which  was  .furnished  there  at 
Homestead  shows  this  state  of  facts:  when  the  pro- 
visions were  put  on  board  the  barges  the  arms  were  put 
on  also  ; that  the  sheriff  was  instructed  not  to  swear 
these  men  in  except  in  case  of  trouble,  and  there  is  a 
good  deal  of  doubt,  and  the  sheriff  himself  did  not  seem 
to  know  what  instructions  he  had  given  ; but  that  was 
the  contention  of  the  Frick  people. 

Mr.  Bynum:  Pardon  me,  Mr.  Boatner;  without  any 
intention  you  might  mislead  him,  and  you  should  state 
to  him  that  that  was  the  testimony  which  was  elicited 
at  Pittsburg. 


69 


Mr.  Boatner  : I am  now  stating  to  him  what  testi- 
mony was  stated  there  ; you  understand  that  ? 

The  Witness  : Yes,  sir. 

O.  Now,  I want  to  know  what  use  would  be  made  of 
those  arms  in  the  event  an  attack  should  be  made  upon 
the  boat  in  advance  of  those  men  being  sworn  in.  You 
say  to  this  committee  the  men  were  instructed  they  were 
not  to  use  the  arms  until  after  they  were  sworn  in  and 
then  assailed  ? A.  I desire  to  say  this  : I had  no  reason  to 
anticipate  an  attack  on  the  boat,  and  therefore  gave  no 
instructions  on  that  point.  We  had  every  reason  to 
believe  that  they  could  land  on  the  company’s  property 
without  trouble. 

O.  You  thought  they  could  get  there  without  the 
Homestead  men  knowing  anything  about  it  ? A.  That 
was  the  object. 

O.  Without  the  strikers  ascertaining  that  fact?  A. 
That  was  the  object. 

O.  That  was  the  object  in  sending  them  up  by  boat  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir;  by  boat. 

Q.  Then  the  object  of  furnishing  them  with  arms 
was  to  resist  any  forcible  attack  which  might  be  made 
on  the  works  after  obtaining  possession  ? A.  Made  on 
the  works,  or  any  forcible  attempt  which  was  made  on 
themselves  where  their  lives  were  in  danger. 

O.  Well,  now,  let  me  see  if  we  can  get  at  what  your 
understanding  was.  These  men,  you  supposed,  were 
to  be  gotten  into  the  works  without  the  strikers  know- 
ing it  ? A.  That  was  what  we  hoped  to  do. 

Q.  That  was  what  you  expected  ? A.  That  was 
what  we  expected. 

Q.  They  were  then  furnished  with  arms  ? A.  They 


70 


were  not  ; no,  sir  ; the  arms  were  shipped  by  the  Union 
Supply  Company. 

Q.  We  have  gotten  way  past  that ; the  arms  were 
put  upon  the  boat;  you  do  not  deny  that  ? A.  No, 
sir  ; I do  not. 

Q.  And  the  arms  were  issued  to  the  men  ? A.  Yes, 
sir  ; but  I had  nothing  to  do  with  issuing  them. 

Q.  Was  it  not  contemplated  when  you  shipped  the 
arms  that  they  were  to  be  issued  to  the  men  in  the 
event  it  became  necessary  to  issue  them  ? A.  Yes,  sir  ; 
when  they  were  on  the  company’s  property. 

O.  That  was  the  understanding  when  you  sent  them  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

O.  Now,  then,  in  the  event  any  attempt  should  be 
made  by  the  Homestead  workmen  to  dislodge  your  men 
from  those  works  or  dislodge  the  employees  of  the 
Homestead  Company  from  those  works,  was  it  not  ex- 
pected your  men  were  to  use  the  arms  with  which  they 
had  been  provided?  A.  No,  sir;  not  unless  their  lives 
were  in  danger. 

O.  Then,  if  the  Homestead  strikers  had  come  to  the 
works  and  undertaken  to  put  your  men  off  without  en- 
dangering their  lives,  they  would  not  have  been  author- 
ized to  use  those  guns  ? A.  No,  sir  ; they  would  not. 

O.  If  the  strikers  had  come  there  with  sufficient  force 
just  to  shove  them  out  of  the  works,  they  would  have 
gone  ? A.  Well,  I suppose  if  there  had  been  trouble 
there  they  would  have  fought  there,  but  there  would 
have  been  no  arms  used. 

O.  What  did  you  expect  them  to  fight  with  ? A. 
They  had  three  hundred  what  we  call  night  sticks — 
night  clubs. 

O.  They  were  then  to  use  the  sticks  unless  the  Home- 


71 


stead  people  resorted  to  arms  ? A.  They  were  to  pro- 
tect themselves  and  they  were  to  keep  trespassers  off 
the  company’s  property. 

Q.  How?  A.  Well,  at  the  first  sign  of  trouble  the 
understanding  was  they  were  to  be  sworn  in.  And  after 
that,  if  any  one  attempted  to  come  on  the  property  of 
the  company,  they  would  be  then  peace  officers,  and 
any  one  committing  a breach  of  the  peace  should  be 
arrested. 

O.  It  was  supposed,  then,  if  any  one  attempted  to 
enter  those  works  they  would  be  sworn  in  as  peace  offi- 
cers and  they  would  have  authority  to  arrest  them  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

O.  And  in  the  exercise  of  that  authority  they  were 
authorized  to  use  the  arms  if  their  lives  should  become 
endangered  ; is  that  the  way  of  it  ? A.  If  their  lives 
were  in  danger  and  they  were  fired  on,  and  perhaps 
some  of  them  were  killed,  and  they  supposed  their  lives 
depended  upon  their  firing  back,  they  were  authorized 
to  use  their  arms. 

O.  You  stated  something  about  the  Chicago,  Bur- 
lington and  Quincy  strike  ; how  many  men  did  you 
have  in  the  service  of  the  company  on  that  Burlington 
strike?  A.  Well,  it  extended  from  Chicago  to  Den- 
ver, and  I suppose  that,  guessing  at  the  number,  there 
may  have  been  300  men  employed  there. 

0.  Were  those  men  sworn  in  as  peace  officers  on  that 
occasion  ? A.  At  different  parts  of  the  road  they  were  ; 
yes,  sir. 

O.  Were  the  men  considered  as  employees  of  the 
road  or  as  your  employees?  A.  At  some  parts  of  the 
road  they  were  not. 

Q.  Were  those  men  armed?  A.  The  men  riding 


trains  and  the  men  doing  duty  at  different  points  of  the 
road  where  there  had  been  trouble  were  armed.  Where 
there  had  been  no  trouble  they  carried  clubs. 

O.  What  was  the  purpose  of  having  men  armed  on 
that  occasion  ? A.  Well,  to  protect  their  own  lives  and 
to  protect  the  company’s  employees. 

O.  In  other  words,  to  resist  any  armed  attack  upon 
the  road  or  its  employees  ? A.  To  drive  off  any  armed 
attacks. 

O.  By  the  use  of  arms  ? A.  Well,  if  arms  were  used, 
the  men  would  be  expected  to  protect  themselves 
rather  than  be  killed. 

O.  Well,  as  a general  rule,  it  is  too  late  for  a man  to 
use  arms  after  he  is  fired  upon.  Were  your  instruc- 
tions to  your  men  that  they  had  to  be  fired  upon  be- 
fore they  could  return  the  fire?  A.  There  has  never 
been  a case  where  that  has  not  been  the  case  that  I 
know  of.  They  have  always  been  assailed  first.  If  a 
man  is  standing  on  top  of  a freight  train  and  another  man 
is  standing  upon  a bank  above  him,  and  he  takes  a bowl- 
der and  throws  it  down  on  him,  he  might  as  well  shoot 
at  him  with  a rifle  bullet. 

O.  Would  it  not  be  too  late  to  shoot  the  man  after 
he  had  thrown  the  bowlder  ? A.  I think  if  the  man 
got  away  it  would  not  be  too  late. 

O.  What  is  the  use  of  a man  bein^  armed  if  it  is  not 
for  the  purpose  of  preventing  these  assaults  ? A.  They 
are  to  defend  themselves  with. 

O.  It  seems  to  me  there  is  an  inconsistency  in  your 
statement.  You  say  that  your  men  are  armed  for  the 
purpose  of  defending  themselves,  and  yet  you  say  they 
are  not  to  defend  themselves  until  after  they  are  fired 
upon.  Now,  down  in  my  part  of  the  country  it  is  gen- 


erally  too  late  for  a man  to  defend  himself  after  he  is 
fired  upon  ; he  is  generally  hors  de  combat  afterwards? 
A.  There  is  quite  a difference  between  where  you  live 
and  up  here,  although  the  law  may  be  the  same. 

Q.  Then  they  are  not  as  good  shots  here  as  they  are 
down  there?  A.  No;  I do  not  think  they  are.  In 
fact,  if  the  firing  at  Homestead  had  been  done  to  kill, 
there  would  have  been  a great  many  more  people  killed 
than  there  were.  I have  no  doubt  if  the  men  had 
wanted  to  use  those  arms  they  would  have  obtained 
possession  of  that  yard,  but  they  would  have  had  to 
sacrifice  a great  many  more  lives  to  do  it. 

O.  You  also  stated  you  served  the  New  York  Cen- 
tral Railroad.  How  many  men  did  you  have  in  the 
service  of  that  road  during  the  strike  ? A.  Possibly 
350. 

O.  Were  those  men  considered  as  employees  of  the 
company,  or  your  employees  ; from  whom  did  they  get 
their  orders  while  they  were  in  that  service  ? A.  Well, 
they  got  their  orders  from  me. 

O.  Were  they  sworn  in  as  peace  officers  ? A.  Yes, 
sir. 

O.  Well,  after  having  been  sworn  in  as  peace  officers, 
did  they  continue  to  get  their  instructions  from  you  ? 
A.  Yes,  sir  ; and  the  sheriff  was  in  consultation 

O.  The  sheriff  was  in  consultation  ? A.  Yes,  sir  ; 
at  times. 

0.  Yet  you  say  you  continued  to  give  orders  to  the 
men  ? A.  Simply  in  regard  to  the  protection  of  the 
property  and  the  protection  of  the  employees. 

O.  Now,  by  what  legal  authority  are  you  advised 
that  you  have  the  right  to  instruct  a sworn  officer  of 


74 


the  law;  you  had  no  official  position,  had  you  ? A.  I 
was  sworn  in. 

Q.  Were  you  sworn  in  also  ? A.  Yes,  sir. 

O.  In  what  capacity?  A.  As  a peace  officer. 

Q.  What  sort  of  a peace  officer  ? A.  A deputy 
sheriff. 

Q.  Then  I suppose  you  got  your  orders  from  the 
sheriff  and  gave  them  to  the  men  ? A.  Yes,  sir;  I got 
orders  from  the  sheriff  and  I also  gave  orders  to  the 
men. 

O.  Did  you  have  any  participation  or  did  your  men 
have  any  participation  in  the  strike  which  occurred  at 
St.  Louis  two  years  ago  ? A.  No,  sir. 

O.  You  did  not  ? A.  No,  sir.  You  mean  where  the 
trouble  was  on  the  bridge — what  was  known  as  the 
Missouri  Pacific  strike,  where  the  trouble  was  on  the 
bridge  ? 

Q.  Yes.  A.  No,  sir. 

O.  Are  those  two  strikes,  the  Chicago,  Burlington 
and  Quincy  and  the  New  York  Central,  the  only  strikes 
you  have  had  connection  with  in  the  last  six  or  seven 
years?  A.  No,  sir;  we  have  had  connection  with  a 
good  many  strikes. 

O.  Well,  railroad  strikes  ? A.  I mentioned,  I think, 
the  Lake  Shore,  and  the  one  I did  not  mention  at  the 
time  was  the  Delaware,  Lackawanna  and  Western. 

O.  State  if  there  has  been  any  instance  in  which  you 
have  furnished  men  as  guards  or  policemen  under  such 
circumstances  as  have  been  detailed  unless  they  have 
been  sworn  in  as  deputy  sheriffs  ; in  other  words,  have 
you  made  it  a rule  that  your  men  shall  be  sworn  in  as 
deputy  sheriffs  ? A.  We  made  it  a rule.  Possibly  at 
some  point  on  the  Burlington  road  where  there  was  no 


75 


trouble  the  men  have  acted  as  watchmen  without  being 
sworn  in,  but  only  at  those  points  where  there  has  been 
no  trouble. 

Q.  You  have  stated  that  three  men  were  killed  by 
your  people  in  these  strikes,  and  I have  been  requested 
to  ask  you  if  you  know  of  any  women  who  have  been 
killed?  A.  Never,  to  my  knowledge  ; there  never  was. 
It  was  stated  in  the  papers  that  was  so,  but  it  is  not  a 
fact.  It  was  stated  that  women  were  killed  at  Albany, 
but  that  is  not  the  fact. 

The  Chairman  : Have  you  any  women  detectives  in 
your  employ  ? 

The  Witness  : No,  sir. 

By  Mr.  Boatner  : 

O.  How  many  similar  agencies  are  there  to  yours  in 
the  United  States,  or  are  there  any  others  of  which  you 
know?  A.  There  are  a very  large  number  of  what 
they  call  private  detective  agencies  in  the  United 
States,  in  New  York,  and  all  the  large  cities. 

Q.  Are  there  any  other  agencies  besides  yours  of 
which  you  know  which  furnishes  men,  such  as  you  fur- 
nish, to  aid  corporations  in  resisting  strikes  or  maintain- 
ing lockouts  ? A.  There  have  been  other  agencies 
who  have  furnished  men  to  do  this  work. 

O.  In  late  years  ? A.  Yes,  sir  ; in  the  Lake  Shore 
strike  before  we  took  hold  of  it  there  were  other  parties 
contracting  to  do  the  work. 

O.  Can  you  state  any  other  such  agencies  ? A. 
Well,  there  was  a firm  called  Mooney  & Boland,  of 
Chicago,  who  furnished  men  for  the  strike  ; also  in  the 
street-car  hands’  strike  in  Chicago,  and  the  Lake 
Shore.  There  are  other  parties  who  are  not  known  as 


76 


being  in  the  detective  agencies  who  have  contracted  to 
supply  men  in  small  numbers  as  watchmen  at  different 
points.  That  is  men  who  have  been  officers.  There 
is  an  agency  called  Field’s  who  have  supplied  men  to 
some  roads  there  in  the  Northwest  and  to  mining  com- 
panies in  the  Northwest. 

The  Chairman  : Have  you  furnished  any  men  in  the 
case  of  the  troubles  in  Idaho  which  are  now  going  on 
there  ? 

The  WiTNESS  : No,  sir. 

By  Mr.  Bynum  : 

O.  Is  your  organization  in  the  form  of  a corporation 
ora  mere  company?  A.  It  is  a copartnership. 

Q.  You  have  stated  fully,  I presume,  the  object  of 
that  copartnership  ? A.  It  is  for  the  carrying  on  of 
the  general  detective  business  and  having  a watch 
force. 

O.  What  was  the  object  of  your  furnishing  men  ; for 
what  purpose  have  you  furnished  men  to  railroad  cor- 
porations transporting  interstate  commerce  and  carry- 
ing the  mails;  in  other  words,  I want  to  know  what 
was  the  object  for  which  these  men  were  furnished  ? 
A.  In  strike  work,  strike  troubles. 

O.  Well,  at  any  time,  what  was  the  purpose  for  which 
they  were  employed?  A.  Well,  of  course  we  do  other 
work  for  railroad  companies  outside  of  strike  work  ; we 
do  detective  work. 

O.  But  in  strike  work,  say  ? A.  Well,  we  have  fur- 
nished them  for  the  purpose  of  protecting  the  property 
and  employees,  for  the  moving  of  trains,  and  seeing  that 
trains  were  kept  moving  ; for  clearing  yards  of  strikers 
and  switch  yards  and  protecting  life  and  property  gen- 
erally, and  passengers. 


77 


O.  The  purpose  was  for  the  movement  of  trains  upon 
schedule  time  and  to  prevent  interference  with  them  ? 
A.  Always  so. 

By  the  Chairman: 

O.  Have  you  ever  supplied  men  for  the  interference 
with  the  running  of  trains  or  the  transportation  of  in- 
terstate trade  or  commerce?  A.  Never.  Our  whole 
work  in  connection  with  strikes  on  railroads  has  been 
to  raise  blockades  and  move  trains,  never  to  stop  them. 

Q.  To  allow  trains  to  run  on  their  regular  time  ? A. 
Yes,  sir  ; where  trains  have  been  obstructed  by  strikers 
and  discontented  employees,  or  for  any  other  causes 
which  might  arise  during  the  strike,  our  duties  have 
been  to  get  the  trains  started  and  kept  moving,  all 
freight,  passenger  and  mail  trains,  as  rapidly  as  we  can. 

Q.  You  do  that  for  a consideration  ; the  companies 
pay  you,  I suppose?  A.  Yes,  sir. 

By  Mr.  B RODERICK: 

O.  Where  is  your  principal  office  ? A.  Our  princi- 
pal office  ? We  call  Chicago  our  principal  office,  as 
that  is  where  we  originated  from,  but  the  business  now 
is  such  we  call  New  York  and  Chicago  our  principal 
offices. 

Q.  You  stated,  I believe,  that  it  was  a partnership; 
have  you  never  had  a charter  from  any  State  ? A. 
Never. 

O.  Does  the  law  of  Illinois  require  a partnership  to 
be  in  writing  and  recorded  ? A.  I think  not. 

0.  I refer  to  the  articles  of  copartnership  ? A.  I 
think  not. 

O.  Do  you  know  whether  the  articles  of  copartner- 
ship are  in  writing  or  not  ? A.  Yes,  sir. 


78 


Q.  Have  you  a copy,  and  could  you  furnish  the 
committee  with  a copy?  A.  I have  a copy. 

Q.  Have  you  one  with  you?  A.  No,  sir;  I have  not 
seen  the  articles  of  copartnership  for  many  years. 

O.  Can  you  state,  in  substance,  the  object  of  the  co- 
partnership more  definitely  than  you  have  ? A.  Only 
that  the  copartnership  is  for  the  carrying  on  of  the 
general  detective  business  and  the  private  watch  force. 

O.  When  you  first  inaugurated  your  enterprise,  the 
only  object  was  to  establish  and  maintain  a detective 
agency?  A.  And  a private  watch  force.  I think  the 
agency  was  started  in  1850  by  my  father,  and  in  1857 
he  established  a private  watch  force  ; that  is  what  we 
call  the  merchant’s  force,  to  watch  stores,  banks,  and 
private  residences. 

By  the  Chairman: 

O.  Allan  Pinkerton  was  the  father  of  you  and 
William  A.  Pinkerton?  A.  Yes,  sir. 

O.  You  and  he  are  brothers?  A.  Yes,  sir. 

By  Mr.  Broderick: 

O.  The  original  purpose  was  to  establish  and  main- 
tain a detective  agency?  A.  Yes,  sir;  that  was  the 
original  idea  at  the  time  it  was  started. 

O.  But  the  scope  of  your  organization  has  been 
enlarged?  A.  Yes,  sir. 

O.  Are  you  required  to  report,  or  do  you  report  to 
any  authority  in  the  States  where  you  operate  ? A. 
When  we  are  sworn  in,  if  at  any  time  we  are  sworn  in, 
we  report ; if  not,  no,  sir. 

O.  Have  you  ever  been  subject  to  the  order  of  the 
governor  in  any  State  in  which  you  have  operated  ? 
A.  Occasionally.  If  we  serve  the  governor’s  warrant 


79 


we  are  supposed  to  report  on  it,  and  we  do  report  on 
it;  that  is,  in  criminal  cases. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  been  authorized  by  the  governor 
of  a State  to  do  anything  other  than  serving  of  a 
warrant?  A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  other  service  have  you  been  authorized  to 
do  ? A.  Our  men  have  been  sworn  in  as  coal  and  iron 
policemen  under  the  State  law. 

O.  In  what  State?  A.  In  the  State  of  Pennsylvania. 
I think  we  organized  the  first  coal  and  iron  police 
in  the  State  of  Pennsylvania  at  the  time  of  the  Molly 
Maguire  troubles. 

Q.  The  governor  there  exercises  some  control  and 
authority  over  the  police  ? A.  Over  the  coal  and  iron 
police ; that  is,  their  commission  comes  from  the 
governor. 

The  Chairman  : There  is  a statute  there  which 
authorizes  the  governor  to  appoint  men  railroad  police, 
and  coal  and  iron  police  ? 

Mr;  Broderick  : I have  understood  there  was. 

The  Witness  : When  I spoke  of  his  swearing  us  in 
I referred  to  our  men,  our  employees. 

Q.  From  what  State  were  those  men  brought  to 
serve  as  coal  and  iron  police?  A.  When  the  coal  and 
iron  police  were  first  organized  the  men  came  from 
Chicago  and  part  of  them  from  Philadelphia.  At  that 
time  it  was  not  probably  known  that  they  were  our 
men.  I do  not  know  whether  the  governor  understood 
they  were  our  men  or  not. 

Q.  Has  your  association  ever  been  recognized  as  an 
association  by  the  governor  of  any  State  ? A.  Only  to 
the  extent  we  have  been  working  for  the  governors  of 
different  States  ; we  have  done  a great  deal  of  this  work. 


80 


Q.  What  sort  of  work  ? A.  Detective  work. 

Q.  Nothing  more  than  detective  work?  A.  Detect- 
ive work. 

By  Mr.  Boatner  : 

Q.  Is  it  true  you  were  employed  to  police  this  city, 
or  to  assist  in  policing  this  city,  at  the  last  inauguration? 
A.  To  this  extent — that  I selected  a number  of  men 
who  were  brought  in  from  the  outside,  from  the 
different  cities,  for  the  purpose,  during  the  inauguration, 
of  picking  out  thieves,  pickpockets,  and  confidence  men, 
but  only  in  the  detective  line  ; in  no  other  way. 

O.  At  whose  suggestion  ? A.  I think  it  was  the 
board  of  police. 

Q.  The  strikers,  I believe,  or  Mr.  Weihe,  who  is  a 
representative  of  the  Amalgamated  Association,  claimed 
that  the  methods  of  the  strikers  are  purely  peaceable ; 
that  they  only  persuade  people  not  to  accept  the  posi- 
tions which  they  vacate,  or  from  which  they  have 
been  locked  out,  and  that  they  did  not  encourage  any 
sort  of  violence  or  countenance  it.  Now,  I understand 
you  to  say  your  men  are  never  authorized  to  use 
arms  or  force  until  they  are  attacked,  and  I want  you  to 
explain  to  us  how  you  and  your  men  and  the  strikers 
get  together  under  these  conditions  ? A.  Well,  I never 
knew  a strike  in  my  life,  and  I have  seen  and  had  to  do 
with  a great  many  of  them,  where  these  labor  organiza- 
tions have  not  taken  hold  of  non-union  men  who 
wanted  to  go  to  work  and  caught  them  and  beaten 
them.  I have  seen  men’s  faces  beaten  into  a jelly  ; I 
have  seen  men  knocked  off  freight  trains  and  shot  off 
the  top  of  freight  trains  ; I have  known  of  strikers, 
members  of  this  very  Knights  of  Labor,  putting  obstruc- 


81 


tions  on  the  tracks  to  throw  off  trains  moving  on  the 
railroad  at  night  time,  on  a part  of  the  road  where  they 
run  the  fastest  down  an  embankment,  and  where  there 
were  nothing  but  sleeping  cars  on  the  train  ; I know 
of  members  of  this  same  Knights  of  Labor  who  have 
been  convicted  and  sent  to  State  prisons  for  that  very 
offense.  I have  seen  men  who  wanted  to  work  treated 
worse  than  savages  by  those  very  representatives  of 
these  secret  labor  organizations,  and  there  has  never 
been  a case,  and  they  cannot  cite  a case,  where  they 
have  not  been  the  means  of  bringing  on  trouble,  and  I 
notify  them  to  do  it  if  they  can.  I have  known  of  them 
putting,  in  the  strike  at  Chicago — the  iron  strike — 
where  stoves  were  molded,  high  explosives  in  the  molds 
so  that  when  the  hot  iron  was  putin  the  molds  it  would 
explode.  On  the  Chicago,  Burlington  & Quincy  strike 
members  of  this  very  organization  were  arrested  and 
convicted  for  putting  dynamite  under  cars.  There 
were  two  trains  wrecked  on  the  Central  road,  one  a fast 
express  on  the  way  from  Chicago,  and  the  men  who 
committed  these  acts  were  convicted,  and  they  were 
members  of  the  Knights  of  Labor,  and  they  confessed 
they  were  furnished  money  by  the  Knights  of  Labor. 

Q.  There  is  one  other  question  I wanted  to  ask  you. 
Knowing  the  hostility  of  the  Knights  of  Labor  people 
and  organized  labor  generally  to  your  force,  and  know- 
ing that  in  all  probability  sending  your  men  to  Home- 
stead would  result  in  a collision,  why  did  you  send  them 
there  without  the  authority  of  the  officers  of  Allegheny 
County,  and  without  stipulating  that  they  should  be 
qualified  as  officers  before  they  approached  the  Home- 
stead works  ? A.  I stipulated  that  as  far  as  possible. 

I had  no  reason  to  know  that  our  men  would  go  and  be 


82 


assaulted  ; we  supposed  our  men  would  be  landed  on 
that  property  without  assault. 

O.  You  only  supposed  that  because  you  would  slip 
right  in  there  without  the  strikers  knowing  it  ? A.  We 
expected  to  get  them  in  there  without  being  noticed. 

O.  You  knew  you  could  not  get  them  in  over  any  of 
the  railroads  and  that  they  could  not  be  brought  there  by 
daylight,  and  therefore  you  tried  to  get  them  in  there 
at  night?  A.  Yes,  sir. 

O.  That  shows  you  were  fully  aware  that  an  effort  to 
send  them  there  would  result  in  a collision.  Now,  why 
did  not  you  see  the  sheriff  or  some  other  legal  officer 
of  that  county,  and  have  your  men,  if  they  were  going 
to  send  them  there,  qualified  as  officers  of  the  State  of 
Pennsylvania?  A.  That  is  what  we  did  do. 

O.  Did  you  see  the  sheriff?  A.  No,  sir;  the  Car- 
negie people  did. 

O.  You  took  the  word  of  the  Carnegie  people  for  it? 
A.  Yes,  sir;  the  sheriff,  I believe,  testified  to  it. 

O.  But  there  is  a difference  in  the  testimony.  Did 
you  ^ee  any  one  there,  or  seek  the  sheriff,  or  an)*  other 
officer  of  the  county  of  Allegheny,  to  have  him  authorize 
these  men  to  be  sent  there  ? A.  No,  sir. 

O.  Have  you  got  any  such  paper  in  your  possession  ? 
A.  No,  sir;  from  the  sheriff,  no  sir. 

O.  Or  any  other  officer?  A.  No,  sir. 

O.  Then  you  merely  accepted  the  verbal  statement 
of  the  Carnegie  firm  ? A.  Of  their  representative. 

O.  And  you  acted  entirely  upon  their  representation  ? 
A.  As  they  represented  it  to  me. 

By  the  Chairman  : 

O.  How  many  detectives  did  you  furnish  here  in 


83 


Washington  at  the  last  inauguration  ? I understood 
you  to  say  you  furnished  some.  A.  I think  we  fur- 
nished anywhere  from  sixteen  to  twenty.  They  were 
detectives  selected  from  different  parts  of  the  country, 
as  I say,  for  the  purpose  of  keeping  away  thieves. 

O.  With  whom  did  you  contract  to  furnish  those 
men  ? A.  There  was  no  contract,  as  you  might  call  it— 
that  is,  a signed  contract.  It  was  simply  a notice  sent. 

O.  Somebody  paid  for  it?  A.  Yes,  sir;  it  was  paid 
for  by  the  order  of  the  Board  of  Police  Commissioners. 

O.  And  application  was  made  by  the  chief  of  police  ? 
A.  I could  not  say  whether  application  first  came 
through  the  chief  or  secretary,  but  they  have  the  letters 
which  would  show,  I suppose.  It  was  somebody  in 
authority  there,  and  I think  the  board  authorized  them 
to  be  employed. 

O.  They  were  here  for  duty  only  as  detectives  ? A. 
Yes,  sir;  to  pick  out  professional  thieves  who  gather 
where  great  crowds  gather  at  any  time,  and  they  ar- 
rested, I think,  about  forty. 

By  Mr.  Boatner  : 

Q.  Did  you  ever  detail  any  of  your  men  for  services 
as  Knights  of  Labor  ? A.  Well,  not  services  as  Knights 
of  Labor.  I suppose  we  have  got  men  who  have  been 
members  of  the  Knights  of  Labor. 

O.  My  question  was  whether  you  ever  detailed  them 
to  become  Knights  of  Labor,  and  to  serve  in  that  direc- 
tion ? A.  Well  I 

Q.  You  may  be  like  Mr.  Frick,  and  it  may  be  a secret 
which  you  do  not  care  to  give  away  ? A.  If  I can  I 
should  prefer  not  to  answer  that  question. 

The  Chairman  : That  would  go  into  one  of  the  pri- 
vate methods  of  transacting  your  business. 


84 


The  Witness  : Yes,  sir — that  is,  the  detective  part 
of  it. 

By  Mr.  Bynum  : 

0.  Those  detectives  you  furnished  here  at  the  in- 
auguration I understood  you  to  say  were  simply  fur- 
nished to  detect  thieves,  etc.  That  is  the  custom  in  all 
the  great  cities  in  the  country,  where  large  crowds 
gather  together?  A.  Yes,  sir;  where  unusual  crowds 
gather  together. 

O.  Where  the  municipal  authorities  in  those  local- 
ities call  on  the  police  officers  from  different  cities,  who 
are  acquainted  with  professional  thieves  ? A.  They 
make  what  they  think  is  the  best  selection,  and  that  is 
the  only  work  that  we  have  done  in  the  District  of  Co- 
lumbia that  I know  of. 

O.  You  say  you  know  of  only  three  persons  having 
been  killed  by  your  men  ? A.  Yes,  sir. 

O.  Do  you  mean  the  only  persons  killed  where  your 
employees  were  engaged  ? A.  Yes,  sir. 

O.  How  many  men  were  killed  at  the  coke  strike? 
A.  None,  I think. 

O.  How  many  people  were  killed  at  the  Connellsville 
strike  ? A.  I do  not  remember  of  anybody  being  killed 
there — that  is,  killed  at  the  time.  Of  course,  men  might 
have  been  killed  by  railroad  trains  or  something  of  that 
kind,  but  I do  not  remember  it. 

Q.  Do  you  know  of  any  one  having  been  killed  in  a 
collision  between  your  men  and  strikers  ? A.  No,  sir: 
not  there.  Our  watch  service  and  our  detective  service 
are  entirely  separate  ; the  detective  business  is  one 
thing  and  the  watch  is  another,  and  they  are  the  same 
as  two  different  institutions. 


85 


O.  I understand  that.  The  watch  service  finally 
grew  and  developed  with  the  necessity  for  sending 
watchmen  to  protect  property?  A.  Yes,  sir;  these 
men  who  go  out  on  strike  work — the  papers  call  them 
detectives,  but  they  are  none  of  them  detectives — they 
are  simply  watchmen,  as  none  of  the  detectives  go  on 
that  kind  of  work. 

By  Mr.  Broderick  : 

Q.  You  spoke  of  furnishing  the  last  inauguration 
with  some  men.  Has  that  been  the  custom  heretofore, 
or  has  this  been  the  only  case?  A.  I think  on  one  or 
two  previous  occasions  we  have  furnished  men,  but  not 
to  the  extent  we  furnished  them  at  this  time,  on  this 
last  occasion  ; and  whether  it  was  because  their  services 
were  satisfactory  on  the  previous  occasion,  I cannot  say, 
but  on  this  last  occasion  it  was  given  to  me  to  select 
the  men  who  were  to  be  brought  from  the  outside. 

O.  Do  you  remember  on  what  other  occasion  you 
furnished  them,  or  what  other  inauguration  ? A.  Well, 
I suppose  it  was  the  one  before  that. 

O.  The  one  before  the  last?  A.  It  was  either  that 
or  when  there  was  some  large  crowd  of  people  here,  but 
that  was  only  two  or  three  men,  and  on  the  last  occa- 
sion we  furnished,  I think,  anywhere  from  16  to  20. 

O.  You  furnish  men  to  State  fairs  and  gatherings  of 
that  nature  ? A.  Yes,  sir  ; where  we  are  applied  to. 

By  the  Chairman  : 

0.  You  say  you  do  not  employ  any  women  ? A.  We 
do  as  typewriters  and  clerks. 

O.  Not  as  detectives,  nor  in  the  guard  business?  A. 
No,  sir. 

Mr.  Boatner  : I suppose  if  women  possessed  the 


86 


necessary  qualifications  you  would  not  debar  them  on 
account  of  their  sex  ? 

The  Witness  : We  do  not  employ  them.  Those 
who  want  to  go  into  detective  business  are  sort  of 
unreliable,  and  you  cannot  depend  on  them,  you  can- 
not bet  on  them. 

By  the  Chairman  : 

O.  Here  is  a statement  which  you  and  your  partner 
furnished  to  this  committee.  I see  by  the  character  of 
it  that  you  could  not  testify  to  all  of  it  because  a good 
deal  of  it  is  argumentative.  Do  you  swear  that  the 
statement  of  facts  which  it  contains  are  true  ? A.  Yes, 
sir. 

Q.  And  you  desire  it  to  go  along  with  your  testimony 
as  a statement  of  your  case  ? A.  Yes,  sir. 

By  Mr.  Boatner  : 

O.  There  is  one  single  question  I want  to  ask,  with 
the  chairman’s  permission.  Do  you  conduct  your  busi- 
ness in  any  State  where  the  laws  of  the  State  prohibit 
it,  as  far  as  you  know  ? A.  I do  not  exactly  under- 
stand the  question.  I do  not  know  of  any  State  which 
prohibits  our  carrying  on  a detective  business. 

O.  That  is  what  I wanted  to  get  at ; but  what  I mean 
is,  in  the  way  of  furnishing  bodies  of  men  for  the  pro- 
tection of  property  in  case  of  strikes  or  lockouts  such  as 
you  have  named,  have  you  been  stopped  from  the  busi- 
ness by  the  officers  of  any  State?  A.  No,  sir. 

O.  As  being  contrary  to  the  laws  of  the  State  ? A. 
No,  sir. 

Mr.  Bynum  : The  only  laws  which  have  been  passed 
are  those  which  prohibit  police  powers  being  conferred 
upon  others  than  residents  of  the  State. 


87 


The  Witness:  That  is  it;  residents  of  a county. 

Mr.  Bynum  : That  is  a law  of  Indiana,  I believe. 

Mr.  Boatner  : Have  such  laws  been  passed  in  some 
counties  ? 

Mr.  Bynum  : Indiana  has  a law  which  prohibits  them 
from  conferring  police  powers  on  any  others  than 
residents  of  a county,  and  he  must  be  a resident  for  a 
stated  length  of  time. 

By  the  Chairman  : 

O.  What  is  your  method  of  recruiting  men  for  this 
service  as  guards  or  watchmen  ? A.  Well,  take  for 
instance,  the  Carnegie  strike.  There  are  all  the  time 
constantly  applying  to  us  parties  who  want  employment 
as  watchmen  or  detectives.  Each  one  who  applies  is 
furnished  an  application,  a printed  application,  and  he 
writes  out  his  application.  These  application  blanks 
ask  certain  questions,  which  are  to  be  answered.  He 
writes  out  his  application,  and  on  the  margin  of  the  ap- 
plication the  superintendent  or  assistant  superintendent, 
who  has  examined  the  man,  must  state  what  his  im- 
pressions are  in  regard  to  the  man  as  he  sees  him  and 
talks  to  him.  If  at  any  time  we  propose  to  employ 
that  man  we  then  go  into  his  references,  which  he  gives 
in  his  application.  For  instance,  in  the  Carnegie 
strike,  if  we  wanted  more  men  than  we  had  our- 
selves we  used  those  applications.  We  went  back  to 
those  applications.  We  sent  for  the  men  to  explain 
what  we  wanted  them  for.  If  they  wanted  the  employ- 
ment they  took  it.  If  they  did  not  not  want  it  they  did 
not  take  it.  It  has  been  stated  I advertised  in  New 
York  ; I did  not  do  that. 

O.  How  many  of  the  310  or  312  men  there  were  your 


88 


regular  employes,  or  what  portion  were  recruited  who 
had  not  served  you  before  ? A.  I think  two-thirds 
fully  were  men  who  were  in  our  employ,  and  had  been 
in  our  employ,  and  whom  we  knew.  The  others  were 
men  who  had  been  got  on  these  applications  to  us  and 
whose  references  we  looked  into. 

O.  One  of  the  witnesses  who  testified  before  us,  Mr. 
Kennedy,  a boatman,  who  was  on  the  barge,  testified 
that  not  more  than  40  or  50  of  your  men  were  on 
the  deck  of  the  barge  and  fired  at  the  time  when  the 
strikers  on  the  shore  or  the  mob  were  firing ; that  it  was 
a sudden  fusillade  and  both  parties  ran  ; the  strikers  on 
shore  fled  in  every  direction,  and  your  men  ran  back 
into  the  barges  and  hid  ; many  of  them  stating  when  he 
suggested  to  them  just  afterwards  that  they  might  go 
out  and  take  possession  of  the  property  that  they  did 
not  come  there  to  fight  ; that  they  only  came  there  to 
stand  guard  ; and  he  said,  furthermore,  that  he  never 
saw  such  cowardice  in  his  life.  What  do  you  say  in 
regard  to  that  ? A.  I have  heard  the  stories  in  regard 
to  the  matter.  I have  also  questioned  the  officers  who 
had  charge.  They  stated  to  me  they  could  have  taken 
possession  of  the  yard  right  at  the  start,  almost  any 
time  before  10  o’clock,  with  50  or  75  men,  but  they 
would  have  had  to  kill  a number  of  people,  and  among 
them  women  and  children,  and  they  concluded  not  to 
do  anything  of  the  kind.  They  say  the  force  down 
there  was  firing  over  their  heads  and  it 

O.  Over  whose  heads  ? A.  Over  the  strikers’  heads 
— and  it  goes  to  show  that  must  have  been  so  or  there 
would  have  been  more  killed  than  there  were. 

O.  What  kind  of  arms  did  your  men  have  ? A. 
Winchester  rifles. 


89 


Q.  They  are  powerful  weapons  ? A.  I understand 
at  the  start  there  were  not  over  20  men  who  were  given 
arms,  and  afterwards  when  the  thing  got  to  be  pretty 
hot  there  were  about  40  men  armed ; but  when  it 
started  there  were  not  over  15  or  20  armed. 

0.  The  testimony  was  they  were  getting  arms  out 
after  they  had  seen  this  hostile  demonstration  and  some 
shots  had  been  fired  at  the  boat  coming  up  the  river, 
and  that  they  were  unboxing  their  arms  when  the 
boat  landed  ? A.  That  is  the  way  I understand  it. 

By  Mr.  Broderick  : 

O.  Are  there  similar  agencies  to  yours  in  this 
country  ? A.  There  are  large  numbers  of  detective 
agencies.  There  is  hardly  a city  of  any  size  in  the 
country  that  has  not  got  them. 

0.  Do  you  know  whether  any  private  agencies  are 
chartered  by  the  State  ? A.  Some  are,  I think.  I am 
not  sure  of  that.  I think  that  is  so. 

O.  Are  they  generally  organized 

The  Witness  (interrupting)  : That  is  what  we  call  a 
license. 

0.  Are  they  generally  organized  and  incorporated 
like  yours?  A.  We  are  not  incorporated,  sir;  we  are 
just  a copartnership. 

0.  That  is  the  rule,  is  it,  simply  to  form  a partner- 
ship? A.  Some  are  incorporated  and  some  have  licenses 
to  operate. 

By  the  Chairman  : 

O.  Yours  is  simply  a private  partnership  between 
you  and  your  brother  ? A.  Yes,  sir. 

0.  In  the  case  of  the  New  York  Central  Railroad 
strike  did  you  have  any  correspondence  with  any  officers 


90 


of  that  company  prior  to  the  employment  of  your  men  ? 
A.  Oh,  no  ; I think  it  was  all  done  by  personal  inter- 
views. 

O.  With  what  officers  or  employees  of  the  company 
or  agents  ? A.  Personally  I was  up  on  the  line  of  the 
road  attending  court  in  a burglary  case  when  the  strike 
came  on  the  Central  Railroad,  and  it  was  not  expected 
at  all  ; it  was  very  sudden.  It  came  on  within  two  or 
three  hours  when  the  order  making  the  strike  was  given 
and  the  trains  were  all  tied  up,  and  as  soon  as  I could 
get  to  Albany  I went  there  to  get  directions  from  New 
York  by  telegraph,  and  I stayed  at  Albany  during  the 
whole  strike. 

O.  From  whom  did  the  telegram  come  ? A.  Mr. 
Bangs,  who  was  our  superintendent  in  New  York;  he 
was  in  consultation  with  the  officials  of  the  railroad. 

O.  Who  were  the  officials  of  the  railroad  who  ne- 
gotiated for  the  employment  of  your  men  ? A.  I 
think  that  Mr.  H.  Walter  Webb,  the  vice-president, 
was  probably  the  one  who  did  it,  but  I did  not  see  him 
until  after  the  strike  was  over,  or  rather,  I saw  him 
when  he  came  up  the  road  on  one  or  two  occasions, 
but  I stayed  in  Albany  and  was  not  in  New  York. 

O.  Have  you  the  letters  and  correspondence  touch- 
ing the  matter  of  your  employment,  or  any  directions, 
printed  or  written,  or  contracts  in  writing  which  you 
can  furnish  ? A.  From  the  officers  of  the  company  ? 

O.  Yes;  between  you  and  them  ? A.  No,  sir;  there 
was  nothing  of  the  kind. 

O.  The  negotiations  you  say  were  not  carried  on  by 
written  correspondence  ? A.  No,  sir;  it  is  simply  an 
understanding. 

O.  Did  your  employees  come  into  collision  with  those 


91 


strikers  of  the  railroad,  and  was  there  any  killing  done 
on  either  side?  A.  We  had  two  men  killed  up  there, 
but  I will  say  there  were  no  men  killed  on  the  strikers’ 
side.  These  men  were  not  killed  either  by  the  strikers. 
They  were  killed  by  the  railroad  trains  while  they  were 
patrolling  along  the  tracks  at  night  time. 

O.  You  testify  that  your  men  did  not  kill  anybody 
there?  A.  Not  a one. 

O.  Never  have  killed  but  three  except  in  the  matter 
of  train  robberies  ? A.  Outside  of  the  Homestead 
strike. 

O.  I mean  up  to  the  Homestead  strike  ; is  that  your 
testimony?  A.  Yes,  sir;  that  is  my  recollection  ; three 
is  the  limit  in  twenty  years. 

O.  You  say  that  during  the  years  you  have  been  in 
the  business  that  some  of  your  men  have  been  indicted 
and  tried  for  shooting  or  for  assaults,  but  you  have 
never  had  one  convicted  by  a superior  court  or  on  final 
trial?  xY  Before  a jury;  no  sir. 

O.  Never  had  one  convicted  ? A.  No,  sir;  notone. 

O.  They  have  always  been  acquitted  ? A.  Yes,  sir  ; 
they  have  always  been  acquitted. 

William  A.  Pinkerton,  sworn  and  examined. 

By  the  Chairman: 

0.  Please  give  your  place  of  residence?  A.  196 
Ashland  Avenue,  Chicago. 

0.  You  have  heard  the  testimony  of  Mr.  Robert  A. 
Pinkerton  ? A.  I have. 

O.  You  are  a brother  of  his?  A.  Yes,  sir. 

O.  And  business  partner  ? A.  Yes,  sir. 

O.  What  do  you  have  to  say  as  to  the  statement  he 
has  made  as  to  the  business  that  you  are  engaged  in 


92 


and  the  manner  in  which  it  is  carried  on  ? A.  I should 
verify  his  statement,  sir,  in  every  particular.  One 
thing  he  appeared  to  neglect,  and  that  is  the  question 
of  riding  men  on  trains  which  probably 

O.  Will  you  state  about  that  ? A.  Well,  off  and  on 
for  the  last  twenty-five  years  all  over  the  United  States, 
particularly  in  the  west  and  southwest,  we  have  fur- 
nished men  to  guard  against  the  attacks  of  train  robbers. 
We  have  furnished  men  to  act  as  guards  to  express 
messengers  and  take  care  of  their  money. 

O.  How  many  railroad  strikes  and  strikes  of  other 
corporations  do  you  remember  that  you  have  furnished 
a guard  or  detective  force,  and  when  and  where  was  it 
and  the  extent,  to  the  best  of  your  recollection  ? A. 
Well,  in  the  Burlington,  Lake  Shore  and  Michigan 
Southern — they  were  the  two  which  came  under  my 
personal  observation — and  the  Union  Pacific. 

O.  In  what  years  ? A.  Well,  the  Union  Pacific 
matter  was  nearly  eight  years  ago,  the  Burlington  was 
about  four  years  ago,  and  the  Lake  Shore  about  five 
years  ago.  It  was  a switchmen’s  strike  on  the  Lake 
Shore  Railroad. 

O.  Did  you  furnish  armed  men  to  those  corporations, 
and  if  so,  about  how  many  to  each  ? A.  Well,  I do  not 
recollect  now,  but  it  might  have  been  between  200  and 
300  in  the  employ  of  the  Burlington.  In  the  Lake 
Shore  and  Michigan  Southern  there  were  probably 
anywhere  from  75  to  90  men,  but  they  only  went  to 
work  after  the  road  had  been  blocked  up  for  five  days 
and  not  a wheel  turned  on  the  road. 

O.  What  did  they  go  there  to  do  ? A.  To  open  up 
the  yards,  clear  men  out  of  the  yards  who  did  not  be- 
long there,  allowing  engineers  and  firemen  to  go  on  the 


93 


trains  unmolested  to  pull  the  trains  out.  For  five  days 
there  had  not  been  a train  taken  away  from  there. 

Q.  In  doing  that  did  you  shoot  anybody  or  were 
they  shot  by  anybody  ? A.  They  did  not  shoot  any- 
body. 

O.  Did  they  have  any  personal  collision  or  conflict 
or  blood-letting  ? A.  Well,  up  in  the  town  of  Lake 
there  were  three  men  caught  turning  a switch,  which 
was  for  the  purpose  of  wrecking  a train  which  was  due, 
and  the  men  were  caught  and  resisted,  and  they  fought 
when  they  attempted  to  make  them  prisoners,  and  they 
were  handled  with  a night  stick.  The  town  of  Lake 
wras  then  on  the  outskirts  of  Chicago  and  is  now  a part 
of  Chicago. 

O.  Do  you  know  of  any  instance  where  your  men  in 
the  employ  of  corporations,  companies,  or  private  indi- 
viduals have  taken  life  or  killed  anybody?  A.  Well, 
the  three  instances  which  my  brother  mentioned  are  all 
I recollect.  We  canvassed  the  matter  over  together. 

O.  Do  you  know  the  names  of  those  men  and  where 
those  killings  occurred  ? A.  I know  the  name  of  one 
of  them,  and  the  other  occurred  down  in  New  York, 
and  we  are  not  sure  in  regard  to  the  third  one,  even, 
and  that  took  place  down  in  Ohio,  in  the  Hocking  Val- 
ley coal  strike  nine  years  ago. 

Q.  Were  your  men  tried  or  indicted  for  the  killing 
of  either  one  of  those  three  men?  A.  The  men  in 
Jersey  were  indicted  and  tried  and  acquitted.  The 
men  in  Chicago  were  arrested,  and  after  examination 
before  a magistrate  the  case  went  to  the  grand  jury,  and 
the  grand  jury  returned  no  bill. 

Q.  How  about  the  Ohio  case  ? A.  There  was  never 
any  one  punished  for  that. 


94 


O.  No  trial  had  there  ? A.  My  recollection  of  that 
is,  it  was  a charge  of  shooting  and  not  of  killing,  but  I 
will  not  be  positive.  I think  there  were  only  two,  the 
case  in  New  Jersey  and  the  case  of  the  Union  stock 
yards  in  Chicago. 

O.  What  was  your  practice  in  regard  to  sending  out 
men  with  guards  ? Do  you  send  them  armed  or  box 
up  their  arms  and  send  them  along  with  the  men,  or  do 
you  depend  upon  their  employers  to  furnish  arms  ? A. 
Well,  the  way  we  got  the  arms  in  the  first  place  was 
the  employers  bought  the  arms. 

O.  In  what  case  do  you  refer  to  ? A.  W ell,  this  is  one  ; 
two  or  three  different  cases,  where  they  bought  arms  in 
small  quantities,  and  when  it  was  over,  the  arms  were 
thrown  on  their  hands,  and  they  said,  “ What  will  we 
do  with  them  ” ; so  we  bought  them  up  in  that  way, 
and  latterly  we  have  furnished  the  arms. 

O.  What  amount  of  arms  and  the  character  of  them 
belong  to  your  company  ? A.  Well,  we  had  about  250 
or  260  rifles. 

O.  Enfield?  A.  No,  sir;  Winchester;  and  I think 
between  400  and  500  revolvers  of  all  sizes  and  all 
kinds. 

O.  You  divided  your  arsenal  and  kept  some  at  one 
place  and  some  at  another?  A.  They  are  all  kept  at 
Chicago. 

O.  That  is  headquarters  and  the  arsenal  or  arms  are 
kept  there?  A.  Well,  as  you  like;  the  arms  were 
there. 

O.  Do  you  keep  on  hand  a good  supply  of  ammuni- 
tion ? A.  No  ; it  is  not  necessary  ; you  can  buy  that  at 
short  notice. 


95 


By  Mr.  Broderick  : 

Q.  You  stated  you  owned  some  arms  which  were 
kept  at  Chicago;  are  your  men  drilled  ? A.  No,  sir; 
not  with  arms  ; not  at  all,  and  never  have  been  drilled. 
All  that  is  newspaper  talk  in  which  there  is  no  truth, 
and  as  a matter  of  fact  they  have  never  been  drilled. 

Mr.  Robert  A.  Pinkerton  : Where  there  has  been  a 
strike  and  they  go  armed  they  went  through  a certain 
drill. 

The  Witness  : But  at  the  headquarters  of  the  organ- 
ization there  has  never  been  anything  of  the  kind. 

O.  There  has  never  been  any  drilling  of  arms  ? A. 
No,  sir  ; nothing  of  the  kind  in  the  world. 

Q.  Any  drilling  without  arms  ? A.  The  patrol  force 
in  Chicago  amounts  to  upwards  of  100  watchmen  now; 
they  are  drilled  in  the  method  of  marching,  etc. 

O.  Some  of  your  men  have  been  with  you  a good 
many  years  ? A.  Yes,  sir  ; a good  many  of  them. 

O.  About  what  proportion  of  your  force  have  been 
with  you  two  years  or  more  ? A.  Well,  sir,  I should 
judge  four-fifths  of  the  men  have  been  with  us  for  five 
years  or  more,  and  from  that  up  to  thirty  years. 

Q.  How  are  they  paid?  A.  Paid  a salary,  sir. 

O.  Monthly?  A.  Weekly. 

By  Mr.  Bynum  : 

O.  There  is  one  question  I will  ask,  to  see  if  I under- 
stand the  testimony  of  you  and  your  brother.  In  cases 
where  you  furnish  men  as  watchmen,  your  instructions 
have  been  that  they  shall  only  use  force  to  resist  force  ? 
A.  That  is  right. 

O.  And  only  so  much  as  to  protect  themselves  ? A. 
Yes,  sir.  I have  always  told  them  in  going  away,  and 


96 


when  I have  been  present  myself,  that  because  a man 
blackguards  and  throws  a stone,  and  women  use  a stick 
or  stone,  that  is  not  occasion  to  go  back  at  them,  but  to 
try  to  get  along  without  any  trouble,  and  never  more  so 
than  in  this  last  case. 

By  the  Chairman  : 

Q.  Part  of  the  men  who  went  to  Homestead  were 
sent  by  you?  A.  Yes,  sir. 

O.  What  number  ? A.  Well,  there  were  over  ioo. 

O.  You  shipped  the  arms  from  Chicago  down  there, 
did  you  ? A.  Yes,  sir. 

O.  Was  that  a part  of  the  contract  ? A.  I do  not 
know  anything  about  the  contract  personally,  sir  ; that 
was  not  made  with  me  ; but  I shipped  them  under  in- 
structions from  New  York;  boxed  them  up  and  sent 
them  to  the  Union  Supply  Company.  I did  not  know 
they  were  even  on  the  boat,  and  there  was  no  intention 
to  put  them  on  the  boat,  and  I was  surprised  at  their 
being  on  the  boat,  and  the  only  reason  that  that  was 
done  was  because  they  could  not  get  anything  on  the 
company’s  property. 

O.  What  is  the  general  character  of  the  men  you  em- 
ploy and  use  as  watchmen  ? A.  Good. 

O.  Are  the  men  of  good  character  ? A.  Yes,  sir ; 
they  cannot  get  there  unless  they  are,  either.  They 
must  be  sober,  industrious,  reliable  men. 

O.  You  say  you  would  not  employ  men  of  doubtful 
character  or  bad  habits?  A.  No,  sir;  we  never  have. 

O.  How  do  you  ascertain  when  you  are  employing 
your  recruits  as  to  their  reliability  ? A.  The  same  way 
a bank  president  would  ascertain  the  habits  of  a clerk 
in  regard  to  reliability,  by  making  him  give  references 


97 


and  looking  up  the  references  and  examining  to  see  if 
he  is  all  right. 

O.  Does  that  habit  prevail— is  this  the  practice  in  all 
your  offices  ? A.  Yes,  sir. 

O.  That  has  been  your  practice  heretofore  ? A.  Yes, 
sir. 

O.  Are  you  or  your  brother  regarded  as  the  head  of 
the  firm  ? A.  Neither  one  ; it  is  a copartnership. 

O.  All  of  these  other  offices  have  to  be  operated  un- 
der your  direction  and  head  ? A.  Under  our  head.  He 
takes  the  Eastern  one,  and  I take  the  West. 

O.  Have  you  ever  furnished  any  men  to  prevent 
railroad  trains  from  running,  and  obstructing  them  ? A. 
Never  in  the  world. 

O.  Or  to  prevent  any  particular  class  of  men  from 
working  in  a factory,  or  furnaces,  or  mines?  A.  Never, 
sir. 

O.  Then  for  what  purpose  do  you  hire  and  furnish 
men  to  these  various  corporations?  A.  To  protect 
property  and  life. 

O.  And  to  enable  them  to  pursue A.  (Interrupt- 

ing.) To  enable  them  to  conduct  their  business  with- 
out interference ; that  is,  unauthorized  interference. 

O.  Did  you  ever  see  that  book  before  (handing 
book)  ? A.  Yes. 

Q.  What  book  is  that  ? A.  This  is  an  ordinary  time 
book. 

Q.  Used  by  whom  and  for  what  purpose?  A.  By  us. 

Q.  Used  by  your  firm  of  Pinkertons?  A.  Yes,  sir. 

O.  To  keep  the  time  for  the  men  in  your  employ? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

O.  Is  that  a list  of  the  names  of  the  men  who  went 
to  Homestead  ? A.  Some  are  in  there  which  I recog- 


98 


nize.  I think  that  is  an  old  list,  sir,  of  men  that  have 
been  used  at  fair  grounds  or  race  tracks,  although  there 
is  quite  a number  of  men  there  I know  who  are  among 
the  number  that  went  to  Homestead. 

Q.  That  book,  then,  was  a book  with  which  the  ac- 
counts of  men  in  your  employ  were  kept?  A.  Yes,  sir  ; 
the  same  as  an  ordinary  time  book  would  be  kept  as  to 
how  many  days  the  men  worked. 

O.  The  entries  in  that  book  seem  to  be  the  time  of 
men  in  1890?  A.  It  is  an  old  book,  probably  taken 
along  for  the  purpose  of  filling  up,  that  is  all.  There 
is  nothing  relating  to  anything  very  recent  in  there. 

0.  That  book  was  said  to  have  been  captured  when 
the  men  surrendered  at  the  barges  ? A.  I do  not  doubt 
it,  sir. 

O.  Do  you  recognize  any  of  those  names  (handing 
sheet)  ? A.  Yes,  sir  ; I know  the  handwriting. 

O.  Whose  handwriting-  is  it  ? A.  It  is  in  the  hand- 
writing  of  one  of  the  men  who  was  shot  there  ; his  name 
is  Hoffman.  I suppose  he  appeared  before  the  com- 
mittee, as  he  was  supposed  to  appear.  These  things 
here  (exhibiting  blank)  are  forms  of  pay  orders.  If  a 
man  is  away  from  home  and  he  wants  to  send  the 
money  to  his  family  he  fills  up  a duplicate  and  sends  it 
to  the  office,  to  be  paid  to  whom  he  pleases,  and  the 
office  turns  it  over  to  whoever  he  wants  it  turned  over  to. 

By  Mr.  Broderick  : 

O.  Have  you  any  means  of  giving  the  names  of  those 
who  were  at  Homestead,  all  of  them?  A.  \ es,  sir. 

O.  Can  you  furnish  the  list?  A.  I guess  I could 
furnish  the  list  from  Chicago. 

O.  You  have  no  means  of  doing  that  now  ? A.  Xo 
sir  ; I could  not  give  it  here  ; no,  sir. 


99 


Mr.  Robert  A.  Pinkerton  : There  is  one  thing  I 
want  to  explain  to  the  committee,  and  that  was  in  re- 
gard to  the  answer  that  has  been  given  that  we  have 
employed  no  one  whose  character  was  not  all  right. 
That  had  reference  to  strike  work,  and  that  answer  is 
correct.  There  have  been  occasions  in  bank  robberies 
where  we  have  bought  information  from  criminals,  and 
where  we  have  used  criminals  where  we  have  been 
obliged  to  do  it,  and  where  the  men  have  had  bad 
characters. 

Mr.  Bynum  : That  is  in  the  detection  of  crime  and 
not  as  peace  officers  ? 

Mr.  Robert  A.  Pinkerton  : Not  as  peace  officers  ; 
no,  sir. 

By  the  Chairman: 

O.  (To  Mr.  Robert  A.  Pinkerton.)  Do  you  testify 
that  you  sent  out  as  guards  or  watchmen  men  of  good 
character  ? A.  As  far  as  we  are  able  to  investigate  they 
are,  and  I do  not  believe  you  can  find  any  instance 
where  that  is  not  the  case.  They  have  been  called 
thieves,  thugs  and  ex-convicts,  but  they  cannot  cite  a 
single  case  of  that. 

O.  I do  not  know  of  any  complaint  of  your  work 
within  the  province  of  detective  work  ; it  is  only  where 
you  have  furnished  these  guards  or  watchmen.  A.  I 
also  desire  to  state,  as  far  as  we  are  personally  con- 
cerned, that  we  have  no  feeling  against  labor  organiza- 
tions and  never  had,  and  all  we  have  ever  done  in  con- 
nection with  labor  work  or  with  these  strikers  is  simply 
to  protect  life  and  property.  We  have  no  quarrel  with 
labor  organizations.  I believe  that  labor  organization 
is  a good  thing,  and  I believe  if  a man  wants  to  strike 


100 


he  has  a right  to  strike,  but  if  a man  wants  to  work  he 
has  a right  to  work,  and  a labor  organization  has  no 
right  to  interfere  with  him  ; but  we  have  no  quarrel  with 
any  labor  organization  that  I know  of,  and  we  have  no 
feeling  against  them. 

O.  And  you  carry  on  the  business  which  you  have 
described,  as  a matter  of  course,  for  the  money  that  is 
in  it  for  you  ? A.  Yes,  sir  ; as  a matter  of  business. 

By  Mr.  Broderick  : 

Q.  xA.bout  what  proportion  of  your  men  which  you 
have  employed  are  citizens  of  the  United  States? 

The  W itness  : All  of  them.  I take  it  all  of  them 
are  ; I do  not  know  of  any  who  are  not. 

By  Mr.  Boatner  : 

O.  Do  you  inquire  about  a man’s  citizenship  when  he 
applies  to  you  for  work  ? A.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  William  A.  Pinkerton:  You  are  referrinor  to 

o 

watchmen  ? 

O.  Yes,  sir.  Where  you  are  sending  out  men  like 
those  in  this  Homestead  case. 

Mr.  Robert  A.  Pinkerton  : They  have  all  got  to  be 
citizens  as  far  as  we  know. 

O.  Do  these  strikes  furnish  you  with  a considerable 
part  of  your  business?  A.  No,  sir;  it  is  an  outside 
branch  of  the  business  entirely. 

The  Chairman  : The  detective  business  pays  better 
than  that  ? 

Mr.  Robert  A.  Pinkerton  : We  have  never  looked 
for  any  strike  work  ; but  it  is  something  which  has 
grown  up  on  our  shoulders. 

Mr.  Boatner  : I suppose  you  take  that  sort  of  em- 
ployment from  a sense  of  duty  ? 

The  Witness:  Yes,  sir. 


101 


Opinion  of  the  Hon.  George  Ticknor  Curtis,  on  the  legality 
of  the  employment  of  detectives  in  the  Homestead 
strike: — 

“ North  American  Review , ” September , 1892. 

The  editor  of  “The  North  American  Review”  has 
requested  me  to  give  my  opinion  on  “ the  legality  of  the 
employment  of  Pinkerton  detectives  in  such  cases  as  the 
Homestead  strike.”  The  inquiry  relates  to  other  cases 
similar  in  all  material  respects  to  the  recent  occurrences 
at  Homestead,  at  Pennsylvania.  It  also  involves  the 
relations  of  employers  and  employed  in  all  similar 
branches  of  manufactures  ; the  relations  between  the 
owners  of  mills,  factories,  etc.,  and  the  workmen  whom 
they  employ.  A great  deal  has  been  written  on  the 
relations  of  capital  and  labor,  and  written  to  very  little 
purpose.  It  is,  however,  not  difficult  to  define  the 
rights  of  property  owners  or  capitalists  on  the  one 
hand,  and  of  workmen  on  the  other  ; nor  is  it  difficult 
to  determine  what  society — by  which  I mean  the  legisla- 
tive power — owes  to  each  of  them  respectively. 

The  matter  of  the  Homestead  strike  has  been  very 
much  simplified  by  the  statement  made  by  the  Messrs. 
Pinkerton  on  the  2 2d  of  July  to  the  Judiciary  Com- 
mittee of  the  United  States  Senate.  It  appears  that 
for  the  past  twenty  years  what  is  called  the  Pinkerton 
agency  has  been  a private  concern,  which  has  furnished 
detectives  for  the  discovery  of  crime,  and  watchmen  to 
guard  the  property  of  individuals  and  corporations 
during  strikes.  The  men  who  have  been  so  employed 
were  not  public  officers  or  officers  of  the  law,  unless  in 
a particular  case  they  were  made  so  by  some  public 
authority.  They  were  like  any  other  private  individuals 
employed  as  watchmen  to  protect  private  property  from 


102 


the  violence  of  a mob,  from  burglars,  or  any  similar 
danger.  They  had  the  same  rights  of  self-defence  and 
the  same  right  of  defending  the  property  of  their 
employers. 

Homestead  is  a borough  on  the  Allegheny  River, 
ten  miles  from  Pittsburg.  It  contains  about  10,000 
inhabitants.  Most  of  the  male  inhabitants  are  employed 
in  one  capacity  or  another,  either  as  skilled  or  unskilled 
laborers,  in  the  iron  and  steel  manufacturing  establish- 
ments. Their  wages  were  exceptionally  high.  There 
exists  among  them,  as  there  exists  elsewhere,  what  is 
called  a “trades-union.”  This  is  a body  of  workmen 
banded  together  for  the  purpose,  among  other  things, 
of  keeping  up  the  price  of  labor,  and,  by  means  of  a 
strike,  of  coercing  their  employers,  when  the  latter  do 
not  accede  to  their  terms.  A strike  is  a concerted  and 
sudden  cessation  of  work  at  a given  signal  or  order, 
issued  by  the  authority  of  the  union,  in  whom  the 
power  to  issue  it  is  vested  by  the  members.  Sometimes 
this  authority  is  a single  individual ; sometimes  it  is  an 
advisory  committee.  In  all  cases,  when  a strike  is 
ordered,  work  ceases  at  once,  to  the  great  injury  of 
employers  and  employed. 

In  the  Homestead  case,  the  existing  agreement 
between  the  Carnegie  Steel  Company  and  their  work- 
men about  wages,  had  run  out.  Mr.  Frick,  the  manag- 
ing agent  of  the  company,  had  an  interview  with  the 
men,  and  offered  a new  scale  of  wages.  This  the  men 
refused  to  accept.  Mr.  Frick  then  closed  the  mills. 
After  this  the  workmen  seized  the  mills,  excluded  the 
owners  from  their  property  by  an  overwhelming  force, 
and  prevented  the  employment  of  non-union  men. 
Obviously,  it  was  indispensable  that  something  should 


103 


be  done  to  restore  law  and  order,  and  to  reinstate  the 
owners  of  the  mills  in  their  property.  The  local  officer 
of  the  law,  whose  duty  it  was  to  do  this,  was  the  sheriff 
of  Allegheny  County.  His  means  consisted  only  of 
special  duty  sheriffs  appointed  from  the  citizens  at 
large,  and  sworn  in  as  a temporary  and  extemporized 
force.  In  a population  consisting  largely  of  the  striking 
workmen  and  their  sympathizers,  a force  adequate  to 
do  what  had  to  be  done  could  not  be  obtained. 

Thereupon  the  Carnegie  Steel  Company  applied  to 
the  Pinkerton  agency  for  a body  of  watchmen  to  pro- 
tect their  property.  The  agency  refused  to  supply  the 
men  unless  they  should  be  sworn  in  as  deputy  sheriffs 
before  going  to  Homestead.  The  account  runs  : 

“ The  Agency  was  then  assured  that  the  sheriff  of  Allegheny 
County  knew  that  the  men  were  going  to  Homestead  to  act  as 
watchmen  to  guard  the  property  of  the  company,  and  that  the 
sheriff  had  promised  immediately  upon  any  outbreak  or  disturb- 
ance to  deputize  all  the  Pinkerton  watchmen  as  deputy  sheriffs. 
On  that  condition  only  the  agency  consented  to  furnish  about 
300  watchmen.  A large  number  of  these  were  regular  employees 
of  the  agency,  who  could  be  thoroughly  trusted  for  integrity, 
prudence  and  sobriety.  The  sheriff’s  chief  deputy,  Gray, 
accompanied  the  men.”* 

The  men  were  sent  down  the  Allegheny  River  on 
barges.  It  is  immaterial  whether  there  is  or  is  not  a 
law  of  Pennsylvania  which  prohibits  the  sending  of  a 
body  of  armed  men  into  the  State  for  any  purpose.  I 
understand  that  there  is  no  such  law  in  Pennsylvania, 
although  there  is  such  a law  in  some  of  the  New 
England  States.  But  the  Pinkerton  men  were  within 

* Statement  of  Mr.  Robert  A.  Pinkerton  to  the  Judiciary  Committee  of  the 
United  States  Senate,  July  22,  1892. 


104 


the  limits  of  the  State  before  they  were  armed  or  needed 
to  be.  The  boxes  containing  arms  and  ammunition 
were  shipped  from  Chicago,  and  were  to  be  delivered  at 
the  Homestead  yards.  These  boxes,  on  board  the 
barges,  were  not  opened  and  the  contents  distributed 
until  after  the  strikers  had  begun  firing  from  the  shore 
on  the  watchmen  and  it  had  become  an  evident  matter 
of  self-defense.  Klein,  one  of  the  Pinkerton  watchmen, 
had  been  killed  by  the  strikers,  and  about  five  other 
men  shot  and  wounded  before  the  Pinkerton  men  be^an 
their  fire  in  self-defense.  Then  it  was  impossible  to 
shoot  those  firing  from  the  shore  at  the  barges,  because 
the  strikers  had  made  a breastwork  for  themselves  by 
placing  women  and  children  in  front  and  firing  from 
behind  them. 

The  Pinkerton  men  were  obliged  to  capitulate  before 
they  were  allowed  to  land,  and  even  then  they  were  not 
permitted  to  go  to  the  mills  which  they  had  been  em- 
ployed to  protect.  They  were  conducted  by  an  over- 
whelming force  of  the  strikers  to  Labor  Hall,  the  place 
of  meeting  of  the  strikers.  There  they  were  made  to 
promise  to  quit  Homestead  and  never  again  to  serve 
the  mill  owners.  On  their  way  from  the  hall  the)' were 
insulted  and  brutally  assailed  by  a mob,  among  whom 
the  women  were  the  most  violent.  They  were  with- 
drawn from  the  State  by  the  agency,  and  thus  the 
whole  object  for  which  they  had  been  employed  was 
prevented. 

Under  these  circumstances,  the  sheriff  of  Allegheny 
County  applied  to  the  Governor  of  the  State  for  a 
military  force.  The  Governor  declined  to  order  out 
any  of  the  troops  of  the  State,  until  the  sheriff  had  ex- 
hausted his  means  of  restoring  law  and  order  by  the 


105 


appointment  of  special  deputies.  The  sheriff  made  an 
ineffectual  effort  to  do  this,  but  the  citizens  responded 
in  such  few  numbers  that  it  would  have  been  idle  to  rely 
on  the  civil  arm  alone.  When  the  Governor  was  offic- 
ially informed  of  this,  he  ordered  out  the  entire  division 
of  the  State  militia,  about  6,000  men,  under  General 
Snowden,  a capable,  prudent  and  experienced  officer. 
The  troops  were  marched  to  Homestead,  and  encamped 
on  a hill  that  overlooks  the  town.  It  is  only  necessary 
to  say,  concerning  this  part  of  the  history,  that  at  the 
time  at  which  I am  writing  there  is  every  prospect  that 
the  strike  will  be  completely  put  down,  and  thus  the 
State  of  Pennsylvania  will  have  rendered  a great  service 
to  the  whole  country,  employers  and  employed,  capital- 
ists and  laborers. 

On  the  indubitable  facts  of  the  Homestead  case, 
which  I have  taken  great  pains  to  gather  from  authentic 
sources,  I have  no  hesitation  in  expressing  my  opinion, 
as  follows  : 

First , That  the  owners  of  the  mills  had  a perfect 
legal  right  to  employ  any  necessary  number  of  men  to 
defend  their  property. 

Secondly , That  all  the  acts  of  the  Pinkerton  men  at 
Homestead  were  lawful  ; and  that,  as  watchmen,  they 
had  a right  to  bear  arms  on  the  premises  of  the  Carne- 
gie Company  in  order  to  protect  life  and  property, 
whether  they  were  or  were  not  deputized  by  the  sheriff 
of  Allegheny  County  ; and  that  the  agency  had  the 
right  to  ship  arms  for  such  purposes  from  Chicago  to 
the  Carnegie  yards  at  Homestead  ; and  that,  in  view  of 
the  attack  on  the  barges,  the  watchmen  had  the  right 
to  bear  arms  and  defend  themselves;  and  that  all  their 
acts  in  firing  in  self-defense  from  the  barges  after  the 


106 


attack  on  them  were  legally  justifiable  under  the  laws 
of  the  United  States  and  the  State  of  Pennsylvania. 

Thirdly,  That  the  killing  of  Klein  by  one  or  more  of 
the  riotous  strikers  was  a murder. 

Fourthly , That  all  who  stood  by,  sympathizing  with 
and  encouraging  the  strikers,  or  not  exerting  them- 
selves  to  prevent  the  strikers  who  were  armed  from  fir- 
ing on  the  barges,  were  accessories  to  the  murder. 

Having  thus  answered  the  question  that  was  pro- 
pounded to  me,  I shall  devote  the  remainder  of  the 
space  allotted  for  this  article  to  the  consideration  of  the 
duty  of  the  legislative  power  in  the  States  of  this 
Union  in  reference  to  the  whole  subject  of  strikes. 
The  stake  that  society  has  in  all  branches  of  manufac- 
turing industries  and  in  all  the  great  lines  of  communi- 
cation  and  travel  is  too  vast  to  permit  any  body  of  men, 
large  or  small,  on  any  pretext,  to  put  a sudden  stop  to 
production,  or  to  cause  a sudden  paralysis  in  the  system 
of  daily  and  hourly  intercourse  between  different  com- 
munities. 

Unfortunately,  there  is  one  embarrassing  difficulty. 
Whenever  such  a disturbance  as  that  at  Homestead 
occurs,  politicians  at  once  endeavor  to  turn  it  to  the 
advantage  of  their  political  party  ; and  men  in  high 
places,  who  ought  to  be  ashamed  of  themselves,  are 
often  found  encouraging  the  strikers,  for  the  purpose 
of  making  what  is  called  “ political  capital."  Mr.  Car- 
negie happens  to  be  a Republican  in  politics,  and  his 
works  at  Homestead  are  an  eminent  instance  of  the 
beneficial  effect  of  a protective  tariff  on  the  interests  of 
American  manufacturers  and  American  laborers.  For 
this  reason,  Democratic  papers  and  politicians  of  free 
trade  proclivities  take  the  side  of  the  strikers  and 


107 


endeavor  to  excite  hatred  of  Mr.  Carnegie  and  his  busi- 
ness associates.  On  the  other  hand,  some  Republican 
papers  and  politicians  are  prone  to  charge  the  Demo- 
cratic executive  of  Pennsylvania  with  pusillanimous 
hesitation  because  he  did  not  at  once  respond  to  the 
call  of  the  sheriff  of  Allegheny  County.  Whether  we 
shall  ever  be  entirely  free  from  this  disturbing  element 
of  politics  in  reference  to  this  matter  of  strikes,  is 
problematical.  But  it  is  certain  that  the  duty  of  society 
remains  the  same. 

The  first  duty  of  the  legislative  power  is  to  emanci- 
pate the  individual  workman  from  the  tyranny  of  his 
class.  Unless  this  be  done,  capitalists  can  afford  no 
aid  to  the  solution  of  any  labor  problem  Avhatever.  Of 
what  avail  is  it  that  a mill  owner  or  a railroad  com- 
pany is  willing  to  make  fair  terms  with  workmen  if  the 
state  of  things  is  such  that  they  cannot  employ  whom 
they-  please,  on  such  terms  as  will  be  agreed  to  by  the 
men  who  want  employment.  It  is  only  by  making  the 
individual  laborer  a perfectly  free  man  that  society  can 
do  its  duty  to  him  and  to  those  who  wish  to  buy  his 
labor  for  a price  that  he  is  willing  to  take,  and  which  it 
is  for  the  interest  of  those  who  are  dependent  upon  him 
to  have  him  take. 

In  opposition  to  this  view,  it  will  be  said  that  the  in- 
dividual workman  is  a free  agent  now,  and  that  if  he 
choose  to  join  a trades-union  and  bind  himself  not  to 
work  for  wages  less  than  what  the  union  permits  him 
to  take,  it  is  his  own  affair  ; he  is  acting  in  his  own 
right.  There  is  a wide  distinction  between  the  physical 
power  to  do  a thing,  and  the  moral  and  legal  right  to 
do  it.  Men  have  the  physical  power  to  commit  suicide, 
but  society  does  not  allow  that  they  have  a moral  or  a 


108 


legal  right  to  do  it.  On  the  same  principle  the  individ- 
ual workman  should  not  be  allowed  to  commit  moral 
suicide  by  surrendering  his  liberty  to  the  control  of  his 
fellow-workmen.  His  labor  is  his  capital,  all  that  he 
has  in  the  world,  all  that  he  and  his  family  have  to  de- 
pend upon  for  subsistence  from  day  to  day.  It  is  to 
him  and  them  what  money  invested  in  real  estate,  ma- 
chinery, etc.,  is  to  the  capitalist.  Deprive  the  capitalist 
of  the  power  to  determine  what  remuneration  he  shall 
derive  from  the  employment  of  his  invested  money, 
and  you  do  the  same  wrong  as  when  you  deprive  the 
laborer  of  the  free  power  to  determine  what  remunera- 
tion he  will  be  content  to  take  for  the  employment  of 
his  capital,  which  consists  of  his  muscular  power  and 
his  acquired  skill. 

These  doctrines  may  not  be  popular.  They  may  not 
meet  at  once  with  universal  acceptance.  But  until  they 
are  accepted  and  carried  out  in  legislation,  there  can  be 
no  successful  reconcilement  between  the  interests  of 
capital  and  the  interests  of  labor  ; no  adjustment  of 
the  rights  of  society  and  the  rights  of  employers  and 
employed. 

In  order  that  I may  not  be  misunderstood,  I will  now 
draw  the  line  between  what  it  may  and  what  it  may  not 
be  permitted  to  workmen  to  do.  Associations  of  work- 
men, formed  for  the  purpose  of  discussing  the  subject 
of  wages  with  their  employers,  of  obtaining  and  diffus- 
ing information  about  the  price  of  labor  in  different 
places,  and  of  mutual  assistance  in  time  of  sickness,  are 
beneficial  and  should  be  encouraged.  But  the  trades- 
unions  do  not  confine  themselves  to  these  objects. 
They  transcend  the  line  which  divides  what  they  may 


109 


from  what  they  may  not  rightfully  do.  In  this  respect 
they  do  a double  wrong  : 

First,  They  bind  their  members  to  strike  when 
ordered  to  do  so  by  the  governing  authority  of  the  union. 
Now  the  right  to  renounce  an  employment  is  anjndi- 
vidual  and  not  a corporate  right.  The  corporate  body 
of  a trades-union  should  not  be  permitted  to  bind  their 
members  to  quit  work,  as  a body,  when  ordered  to  do 
so  by  the  governing  authority  of  the  association. 

Secondly,  The  trades-unions,  as  most  of  them  are 
now  organized,  prevent  non-union  men  from  getting 
employment,  by  every  species  of  intimidation,  even  by 
personal  violence,  and  sometimes  by  murder. 

This  coercion  of  non-union  men,  however  attempted 
and  in  whatever  it  ends,  should  be  made  a crime,  and 
be  punished  with  severity.  It  is  contrary  to  the  funda- 
mental principles  of  our  institutions.  The  Declara- 
tion of  Independence  says,  "we  hold  these  truths  to  be 
self-evident,  that  all  men  are  created  equal ; that  they 
are  endowed  by  their  Creator  with  certain  inalienable 
rights  ; that  among  these  are  life,  liberty  and  the  pursuit 
of  happiness.  That,  to  secure  these  rights,  govern- 
ments are  instituted  among  men,  deriving  their  just 
powers  from  the  consent  of  the  governed.” 

Be  it  observed  that  these  are  individual  rights  ; that 
they  are  inalienable  by  the  individual  himself.  We 
should  not  permit  a man  to  sell  himself  into  slavery  or 
to  sell  his  own  life.  He  cannot  alienate  his  right  to 
life  or  his  right  to  liberty.  No  more  should  he  be  per- 
mitted to  alienate  his  right  to  the  pursuit  of  happiness 
by  giving  up  his  power  to  consult  his  own  individual 
welfare,  in  obtaining  the  means  of  happiness  ; and  by 
putting  it  in  the  power  of  those  who  are  engaged  in 


110 


the  same  employment  to  take  the  bread  out  of  his 
mouth.  We  have  emancipated  the  colored  race  from 
slavery  ; certain  portions  of  our  own  race  need  eman- 
cipation from  a slavery  that  is  just  as  bad. 

George  Ticicnor  Curtis. 


The  Charge  of  Chief-Justice  Paxson  of  Pennsylvania,  to 
the  Grand  Jury  of  Allegheny  County. 

2j  Pittsburgh  Legal  Journal , N.  S , 106  ( October  26,  1892). 

A corporation  has  the  undoubted  right  to  protect  its  property, 
and  for  this  purpose  could  lawfully  employ  as  many  men  as 
it  might  deem  proper,  and  arm  them,  if  necessary.  It 
would  be  an  act  of  unlawful  violence  to  prevent  the  landing 
of  such  men  upon  the  property  of  the  company,  and  if  life 
were  taken  in  pursuance  of  a purpose  to  resist  the  landing 
of  the  men  by  violence,  the  offense  would  be  murder. 

While  a mere  mob,  collected  upon  the  impulse  of  the  moment, 
without  any  definite  object  beyond  the  gratification  of  its 
sudden  passions,  does  not  commit  treason,  although  it 
destroys  property  and  takes  life;  yet  when  a large  number 
of  men  arm  and  organize  themselves  by  divisions  and  com- 
panies, appoint  officers,  and  engage  in  a common  purpose 
to  defy  the  law,  to  resist  its  officers,  and  to  deprive  any 
portion  of  their  fellow-citizens  of  the  rights  to  which  they 
are  entitled  under  the  Constitution  and  laws,  it  is  a levying 
of  war  against  the  State,  and  the  offense  is  treason. 

While  the  gravamen  of  this  offense  is  the  design  of  overturning 
the  government  of  the  State,  such  intention  need  not  extend 
to  every  portion  of  its  territory.  It  is  sufficient  if  it  be  to 
overturn  it  in  a particular  locality,  and  such  intent  may  be 
inferred  from  the  acts  committed. 

Aliens  domiciled  within  the  State,  and  who  enjoy  its  protection, 
owe  temporary  allegiance  to  it,  and  are  amenable  for 
treason. 


Ill 


Informations  for  treason  having  been  made  against 
numerous  persons  who  had  participated  in  the  strike 
and  riots  at  Homestead  during  the  summer  of  1892, 
Chief  Justice  Paxson,  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  Penn- 
sylvania, sitting  as  a Judge  of  the  Court  of  Oyer  and 
Terminer  of  Allegheny  County,  delivered  the  following 
charge  to  the  Grand  Jury  : 

“Gentlemen  of  the  Grand  Jury: 

The  district  attorney  will  lay  before  you  at  the  pres- 
ent term  one  or  more  indictments  charging  certain  par- 
ties with  the  offense  of'  treason  against  the  Common- 
wealth of  Pennsylvania.  In  view  of  the  gravity  of  the 
charge  the  learned  judges  holding  the  present  term  of 
the  Court  of  Oyer  and  Terminer  for  this  county,  have 
invited  me  to  come  in  and  give  you  some  instructions 
as  to  the  character  of  the  offense,  and  your  duties  in 
regard  to  it.  And  that  you  may  know  that  I am  not 
assuming  to  act  without  right,  it  is  proper  to  say  to  you 
that  by  the  express  terms  of  the  Constitution  of  Penn- 
sylvania the  Justices  of  the  Supreme  Court  are  made 
Justices  ex-officio  of  the  Court  of  Oyer  and  Terminer  in 
every  county  in  the  State.  Notwithstanding  this,  I 
would  hesitate  to  act  were  it  not  that  the  situation  is  so 
grave,  and,  it  is  feared,  the  law  so  much  misunderstood, 
that  an  authoritative  exposition  of  it  seemed  necessary 
in  the  interests  of  good  government.  It  having  required 
the  intervention  of  the  Governor,  as  commander-in- 
chief, and  the  entire  military  power  of  the  State  to 
restore  order,  it  was  considered  proper  for  those  high- 
est in  position  in  the  judiciary  department  of  the 
Government,  to  declare  the  law  in  such  manner  that  it 
may  be  clearly  understood. 


112 


The  offenses  charged  in  the  bills  of  indictment  had 
their  origin  in  what  are  popularly  known  as  the  Home- 
stead riots  of  last  summer.  Many  of  the  incidents  of 
those  riots  may  be  properly  referred  to  as  a part  of  the 
history  of  the  times. 

In  order  that  you  may  the  more  readily  understand 
the  nature  of  the  offenses  charged  in  the  bills  of  indict- 
ment,  I will  refer  briefly  to  some  facts  connected  with 
those  disturbances  about  which  I do  not  understand 
there  is  any  dispute. 

About  the  close  of  the  month  of  June  a disagreement 
in  regard  to  wages  arose  between  the  Carnegie  Steel 
Company,  at  what  is  known  as  the  Homestead  Works, 
and  some  of  its  employees.  It  is  not  necessary  that  I 
should  refer  to  the  details  of  this  difficulty  further  than 
to  say  that  the  dispute  concerned  only  a small  portion 
of  the  employees  of  the  company,  and  those  receiving 
the  highest  wages.  The  parties  being  unable  to  come 
to  an  agreement  that  was  mutually  satisfactory,  the 
company  closed  its  works  on  the  30th  day  of  June  and 
discharged  its  men.  So  far  there  was  no  violation  of 
law  by  any  one. 

The  men  had  the  right  to  demand  what  wages  they 
saw  fit,  and  to  refuse  to  go  to  work  unless  their  demand 
was  satisfied. 

The  company  had  the  right  to  decline  to  employ  the 
men  upon  the  terms  offered  by  them,  and  to  employ 
others  in  their  stead  upon  such  terms  as  could  be  agreed 
upon.  This  arises  from  the  fact  that  the  relation  of 
employer  and  employee  is  one  of  contract  merely. 
Neither  party  has  the  right  to  coerce  the  other  into  the 
making  of  a contract  to  which  his  mind  does  not  assent. 
The  employer  cannot  compel  his  employee  to  work  a 


113 


day  longer  than  he  sees  fit,  or  his  contract  calls  for,  nor 
for  a wage  that  is  unsatisfactory  to  him.  It  follows 
that  the  employee  cannot  compel  his  employer  to  give 
him  work,  or  enter  into  a contract  of  hiring.  Much  less 
can  he  dictate  the  terms  of  employment. 

When  the  negotiations  between  the  parties  came  to 
an  end  all  contract  relations  between  them  ceased. 
The  men  had  no  further  legal  demands  upon  the  com- 
pany, and  they  had  no  more  interest  in  or  claims  upon 
its  property  than  has  a domestic  servant  upon  the 
household  goods  of  his  employer  when  discharged  by 
the  latter,  or  when  he  voluntarily  leaves  his  service. 
Nor  does  it  make  any  difference  that  a large  number 
were  discharged  at  one  time.  Their  aggregate  rights 
rise  no  higher  than  their  rights  as  individuals. 

The  mutual  right  of  the  parties  to  contract  in  regard 
to  wages,  and  the  character  of  the  employment,  whether 
by  the  piece  or  by  the  day,  whether  for  ten  hours  or 
less,  is  as  fixed  and  clear  as  any  other  right  which  we 
enjoy  under  the  Constitution  and  laws  of  the  State.  It 
is  a right  which  belongs  to  every  citizen,  laborer  or 
capitalist,  and  it  is  the  plain  duty  of  the  State  to  pro- 
tect him  in  the  enjoyment  of  it. 

As  before  observed,  but  a small  portion  of  the  men 
were  affected  by  the  proposed  readjustment  of  wages. 
The  larger  portion  of  them,  who  were  members  of  what 
is  known  as  “ the  Amalgamated  Association  of  Iron 
and  Steel  Workers,”  were  not  affected  at  all,  nor  were 
the  large  force  of  employees,  some  3,000  in  number, 
who  were  not  members  of  said  association. 

Upon  the  failure  to  arrive  at  an  adjustment  of  the 
wage  difficulty,  the  company  proposed  to  operate  its 
works  by  the  employment  of  other  men  not  members  of 


114 


the  Amalgamated  Association.  It  had  the  right  to  do 
this  under  the  law  of  Pennsylvania.  This  right  was 
resisted,  and  the  fact  of  its  resistance  and  the  manner 
of  it  are  now  a part  of  the  history  of  the  State.  It  is 
a chapter  which  every  good  citizen  would  gladly  see 
obliterated. 

It  is  a part  of  the  history  of  these  events  that  the 
lodges  composing  the  Amalgamated  Association  pro- 
ceeded to  organize  what  has  been  widely  known  as  the 
“ Advisory  Committee  ” ; that  this  committee  organ- 
ized by  the  appointment  of  a chairman,  and  proceeded 
at  once  to  take  charge  of  affairs  at  Homestead;  that 
among  its  first  acts  was  to  order  the  mechanics,  laborers 
and  other  employees  of  the  works,  amounting  to  about 
3,000,  whose  wages  were  not  affected  by  the  proposed 
change,  and  who  had  entered  into  a new  agreement  with 
the  company,  upon  the  terms  of  their  old  contract,  to 
break  their  contracts  and  to  refuse  to  work  until  the 
Amalgamated  Association  was  recognized  and  its  terms 
agreed  to. 

Up  to  this  point  there  had  been  no  breach  of  the 
peace.  The  men  had  the  right  to  refuse  the  work  and 
to  persuade  their  friends  to  refuse  also.  The  law  has 
no  quarrel  with  labor  associations  so  long  as  they  act 
peaceably  and  respect  the  rights  of  others.  On  the 
contrary,  while  they  keep  within  the  law,  they  have  the 
sympathy  oi  all  good  citizens  in  every  honest,  manly 
effort  to  improve  their  condition.  But  the  State  of 
Pennsylvania  will  not  permit  these,  or  any  other  organ- 
izations, to  trample  upon  the  law  and  deny  the  rights 
of  other  laborers,  not  members  of  such  associations. 

It  is  alleged  that  the  Advisory  Committee  did  more 
than  induce  others  not  to  accept  employment  from  the 


115 


company ; that  it  allowed  no  persons  to  enter  the  mills 
of  the  Carnegie  Steel  Company,  and  even  permitted  no 
strangers  to  enter  the  town  of  Homestead  without  its 
consent ; that  it  arranged  and  perfected  an  organiza- 
tion of  a military  character,  consisting  of  three  divi- 
sions, with  commanders,  captains,  etc.  ; the  captains  to 
report  to  the  division  commanders,  and  the  latter  to 
report  to  the  Advisory  Committee  ; that  a girdle  of 
pickets  was  established  by  which  the  works  and  the 
town  were  guarded  like  a military  encampment ; that 
these  pickets  arrested  every  man  who  attempted  to 
approach  either  the  town  or  the  works  until  he  could 
give  an  account  of  himself  which  was  satisfactory  to 
the  Advisory  Committee ; that  all  discussion  of  the 
wage  question  was  positively  prohibited  ; that  all  these 
and  many  other  things  were  done  to  deprive  the  com- 
pany of  the  use  of  its  property,  and  to  prevent  it  from 
operating  its  works  by  the  aid  of  men  who  were  not 
members  of  the  Amalgamated  Association. 

It  was  in  this  state  of  affairs  that  the  company,  appre- 
hending injury  to  its  property  and  its  possible  destruc- 
tion, applied  to  the  High  Sheriff  of  Allegheny  County 
for  protection.  The  officer  made  an  effort  to  secure 
ioo  deputies  to  go  to  Homestead  pn  the  afternoon  of 
July  5th.  He  succeeded  in  getting  about  a dozen, 
who,  under  the  charge  of  a deputy  sheriff,  attempted 
to  enter  the  works  of  the  company  in  order  to  protect 
them.  They  were  driven  off  with  threats  and  the  au- 
thority of  the  sheriff  defied.  On  the  morning  of  July 
6th  the  company  attempted  to  place  300  watchmen  into 
the  works.  The  men  were  selected  by  the  aid  of  the 
Pinkerton  agency  and  were  in  charge  of  a deputy 
sheriff.  Their  business  and  their  only  business  was  to 


116 


protect  property  of  their  employers.  The  landing  of 
these  men  on  the  grounds  of  the  company  was  resisted 
by  a large  crowd  of  men,  many  of  whom  were  armed. 
Guns,  pistols  and  cannon  were  discharged  at  the  watch- 
men, and  the  fire  was  returned  by  a portion  of  the 
latter.  An  attempt  was  made  to  destroy  them  by  the 
rioters  by  the  use  of  dynamite  and  burning  oil.  Finally, 
after  a number  had  been  killed  and  wounded  on  each 
side,  the  watchmen  surrendered  to  the  Advisory  Com- 
mittee, at  that  time  the  only  authority  permitted  to  be 
exercised  at  Homestead.  Their  treatment  after  their 
surrender  has  few  chapters  to  equal  it  in  savage  war- 
fare, notwithstanding  the  humane  efforts  of  a portion 
of  the  committee  to  prevent  it. 

This  outbreak  was  so  serious  in  its  character  that  the 
Governor  of  the  State,  and  commander-in-chief  of  its 
army,  acting  in  the  strict  line  of  his  duty  and  after  a 
call  for  aid  from  the  High  Sheriff  of  Allegheny  County, 
ordered  out  the  entire  National  Guard  of  the  State  for 
its  suppression.  Since  then  we  have  had  for  many 
weeks  the  humiliating  spectacle  of  a business  plant  sur- 
rounded by  the  army  of  the  State  for  its  protection  at 
an  expense  of  several  hundred  thousand  dollars  to  the 
taxpayers  and  the  business  of  the  country  disturbed  to 
some  extent.  And  for  what? 

We  can  have  some  sympathy  with  a mob  driven  to 
desperation  by  hunger,  as  in  the  days  of  the  French 
Revolution,  but  we  can  have  none  for  men  receiving 
steady  employment  at  exceptionally  high  wages  in  re- 
sisting the  law  and  in  resorting  to  violence  and  blood- 
shed in  the  assertion  of  imaginary  rights,  and  in  entail- 
ing such  a vast  expense  upon  the  taxpayers  of  the  Com- 
monwealth. It  was  not  a cry  of  “ bread  or  blood  ” from 


117  • 


famished  lips  or  an  ebullition  of  angry  passions  from  a 
sudden  outrage  or  provocation.  It  was  a deliberate 
attempt  from  men  without  a grievance  to  wrest  from 
others  their  lawfully  acquired  property  and  to  control 
them  in  their  use  and  enjoyment  of  it. 

The  existence  of  such  a state  of  things  in  a govern- 
ment of  law  indicates  a weak  spot  somewhere.  It  is  not 
in  the  law  itself.  That  is  sufficient  for  the  preservation 
of  order.  All  that  is  needed  is  its  proper  enforcement. 
To  accomplish  this  it  is  only  necessary  that  every  one 
connected  with  its  administration  shall  do  his  duty. 
This  duty  is  as  solemn  and  imperative  with  the  juror  in 
the  box  as  with  the  judge  upon  the  bench.  And  I am 
glad  to  be  able  to  say,  as  the  result  of  my  experience  in 
the  criminal  courts,  that  I have  seldom  known  a jury  to 
falter  in  the  performance  of  a duty  when  that  duty 
has  been  clearly  and  fairly  presented  to  them.  If  jurors 
fail  in  this  respect  the  courts  can  accomplish  nothing, 
and  the  result  is  anarchy. 

It  is  much  to  be  feared  that  there  is  a diseased  state 
of  public  opinion  growing  up  in  regard  to  disturbances 
of  this  nature,  and  that  a confused,  if  not  erroneous, 
view  of  the  law  bearing  upon  these  questions  has  found 
a lodgment  in  the  public  mind.  This  is  evidenced  by 
the  comments  of  a portion  of  the  press,  and  in  the 
utterance  of  demagogues  who  pander  to  the  mob,  and 
of  politicians  who  hunger  for  votes.  It  finds  expression 
in  sympathy  for  men,  who,  without  a recognized  griev- 
ance, trample  upon  the  law,  and  the  rights  of  others, 
yet  have  no  sympathy  for  the  outraged  law,  or  the 
laborer  who  is  beaten  and  sometimes  murdered  in  his 
efforts  to  seek  honest  employment  for  the  support  of 
his  family. 


118 


The  growth  of  this  sentiment  may  have-  been  pro- 
moted to  some  extent  by  the  addition  of  large  numbers 
of  foreigners  to  our  laboring  population.  Many  of  them 
are  densely  ignorant  as  well  as  brutal  in  their  disposi- 
tions. They  have  false  ideas  in  regard  to  the  kind  of 
liberty  we  enjoy  in  this  country.  It  is  needed  that  all 
such  persons  should  be  taught  the  lesson  that  our 
liberty  is  the  liberty  of  law  and  not  the  liberty  of 
license. 

The  present  occasion  requires  me  to  define  the  law. 
I will  endeavor  to  do  it  so  clearly  and  fully  that  there 
shall  be  hereafter  no  excuse  for  misunderstanding  it. 
To  some  extent  it  has  been  already  foreshadowed. 

When  the  company  shut  down  its  works  and  dis- 
charged its  men,  it  was  acting  strictly  within  the  line  of 
the  law.  It  could  not  compel  the  men  to  work,  nor 
could  the  men  compel  the  company  to  employ  them. 
No  arrangement  could  be  made  in  this  regard  except 
in  the  nature  of  a contract  agreed  upon  by  the  parties. 
Upon  this  subject  their  rights  were  mutual. 

The  company  had  the  undoubted  right  to  protect  its 
property.  For  this  purpose  it  could  lawfully  employ  as 
many  men  as  it  saw  proper,  and  arm  them,  if  necessary. 
Many  of  our  banks  and  other  places  of  business  are 
guarded  by  armed  watchmen.  The  law  did  not  require 
it  to  employ  as  watchmen  the  men  from  whom  it  an- 
ticipated the  destruction  of  its  works.  When  a man 
seeks  to  protect  his  house  from  burglars  it  would  be 
unreasonable  to  require  him  to  place  the  burglars  in 
possession  for  that  purpose.  So  long  as  the  men 
employed  by  the  company  as  watchmen  to  guard  and 
protect  its  property  acted  only  in  that  capacity,  and 
for  that  purpose,  it  mattered  not  to  the  rioters,  nor  to 


119 


the  public,  who  they  were  nor  from  whence  they  came. 
It  was  an  act  of  unlawful  violence  to  prevent  their 
landing  upon  the  property  of  the  company.  That 
unlawful  violence  amounted  at  least  to  a riot  on  the 
part  of  all  concerned  in  it.  If  life  was  taken  in  pur- 
suance of  a purpose  to  resist  the  landing  of  the  men  by 
violence,  the  offense  was  murder,  and  perhaps  treason. 
I will  speak  of  treason  later  on. 

The  rights  of  the  men,  as  before  stated,  were  to  re- 
fuse to  work  unless  their  terms  were  acceded  to,  and  to 
persuade  others  to  join  them  in  such  refusal.  But  it 
will  sustain  them  no  further.  The  moment  they 
attempted  to  control  the  works,  and  to  prevent  by  vio- 
lence, or  threats  of  violence,  other  laborers  from  going 
to  work  there,  they  placed  themselves  outside  the  pale 
of  the  law,  and  became  rioters.  It  cannot  be  tolerated 
for  a moment  that  one  laborer  shall  say  to  another 
laborer,  “ You  shall  not  work  for  this  man  or  that  wage 
without  my  consent,”  and  thus  enforce  such  command 
by  brutal  violence  upon  his  person.  And  what  will 
not  be  permitted  to  one  man  to  do  will  not  be  per- 
mitted to  an  organization  of  men. 

It  is  the  duty  of  the  State  to  protect  every  citizen 
within  her  borders.  In  this  there  is  no  distinction  be- 
tween the  laborer  and  the  capitalist.  It  protects  each 
with  equal  impartiality.  When  the  State  fails  to  do 
this  it  fails  in  its  duty  as  sovereign.  And  it  will  pro- 
tect with  a firm  hand  the  individual  laborer  from  the 
tyranny  and  unlawful  demands  of  organized  labor. 
The  law  should  be  so  enforced  from  the  Delaware  to 
the  Ohio,  that  the  humblest  laborer  can  work  for  whom 
he  pleases  and  at  what  wage  he  sees  fit,  undeterred 


120 


by  the  bludgeon  of  the  rioter  or  the  pistol  of  the 
assassin. 

If  we  were  to  concede  the  agrarian  doctrine  that  the 
employee  may  lawfully  dictate  to  his  employer  the 
terms  of  his  employment,  and  upon  the  refusal  of  the 
latter  to  accede  to  them,  take  possession  of  his  prop- 
erty, and  drive  others  away  who  are  willing  to  work, 
we  would  have  anarchy.  No  business  could  be  con- 
ducted upon  such  a principle.  The  doctrine,  when 
once  countenanced,  will  be  extended  to  every  industry. 
Some  of  you,  gentlemen  of  the  grand  jury,  maybe  farm- 
ers. I am  one  myself,  and  take  an  honest  pride  in  it. 
Suppose,  when  your  crops  are  ready  to  be  gathered, 
your  men,  with  or  without  cause,  refuse  to  work,  and 
not  only  refuse  to  work,  but  also  take  possession  of 
your  farm,  and  by  violence  and  threats  prevent  all 
others  from  doing  so,  unless  you  accede  to  demands 
which  you  regard  as  unreasonable.  In  the  meantime 
your  crops  perish  and  you  lose  the  fruits  of  your  year’s 
toil.  Under  such  circumstances  you  would  not  like  to 
be  told  from  this  bench  that  you  have  no  right  to  protect 
your  property,  or  to  employ  men  as  watchmen  for  that 
purpose.  There  is  no  such  law. 

I have  made  these  preliminary  remarks,  in  order  that 
you  may  the  better  understand  the  offense  of  treason 
to  which  I now  come.  It  is  defined  by  the  first  section 
of  the  Act  of  31st  March,  i860.  P.  L.  385,  as  follows  : 

“ If  any  person  owing  allegiance  to  the  Common- 
wealth of  Pennsylvania  shall  levy  war  against  the  same, 
or  shall  adhere  to  the  enemies  thereof,  giving  them  aid 
and  comfort,  within  the  State  or  elsewhere,  and  shall  be 
thereof  convicted,  on  confession  in  open  court,  or  on 
the  testimony  of  two  witnesses  to  the  same  overt  act  of 


121 


the  treason  whereof  he  shall  stand  indicted,  such  per- 
son shall,  on  conviction,  be  adjudged  guilty  of  treason 
against  the  Commonwealth,  and  be  sentenced  to  pay  a 
fine  not  exceeding  $2,000  and  undergo  an  imprison- 
ment by  separate  and  solitary  confinement  at  labor, 
not  exceeding  twelve  years.” 

I am  glad  to  be  able  to  say  that  the  law-abiding 
character  of  our  people  has  been  such  that  heretofore 
no  one  has  been  prosecuted  under  this  Act  since  its 
passage  in  i860. 

It  is  also  proper  to  say,  so  far  as  the  State  is  con- 
cerned, that  this  prosecution  has  not  been  commenced 
from  any  vindictive  feeling,  or  from  any  disposition  to 
multiply  offenses,  or  to  inflict  any  unnecessarily  severe 
punishments.  Its  object  is  merely  to  vindicate  the  law. 
It  is  only  the  maximum  punishment  that  is  fixed  by  the 
statute.  The  Court  possesses  the  power  to  fix  it  at 
any  point  within  it. 

You  will  also  observe  that  the  offense  chareed  is 

o 

treason  against  this  State  and  not  against  the  United 
States,  It  is  a matter  with  which  the  latter  has  noth- 
ing to  do,  and  over  which  its  courts  have  no  jurisdic- 
tion. 

A mere  mob,  collected  upon  the  impulse  of  the 
moment,  without  any  definite  object  beyond  the  grati- 
fication of  its  sudden  passions,  does  not  commit  trea- 
son, although  it  destroys  property  and  takes  human 
life. 

But  when  a large  number  of  men  arm  and  organize 
themselves  by  divisions  and  companies,  appoint  officers, 
and  engage  in  a common  purpose  to  defy  the  law ; to 
resist  its  officers,  and  to  deprive  any  portion  of  their 
fellow-citizens  of  the  rights  to  which  they  are  entitled 


122 


under  the  Constitution  and  laws,  it  is  a levying  of  war 
against  the  State  ; and  the  offense  is  treason. 

Much  more  so  when  the  functions  of  the  State  gov- 
ernment are  usurped  in  a particular  locality  ; the  pro- 
cess of  the  Commonwealth,  and  the  lawful  acts  of  its 
officers  resisted,  and  unlawful  arrests  made  at  the  dic- 
tation of  a body  of  men  who  have  assumed  the  func- 
tions of  the  government  in  that  locality. 

And  it  is  a state  of  war  when  a business  plant  has  to 
be  surrounded  by  the  army  of  the  State  for  weeks  to 
protect  it  from  unlawful  violence  at  the  hands  of  men 
formerly  employed  in  it 

Where  a body  of  men  have  organized  for  a treason- 
able purpose,  every  step  which  any  one  of  them  takes, 
in  part  execution  of  their  common  purpose,  is  an  overt 
act  of  treason  in  levying  war. 

Every  member  of  such  usurped  government,  whether 
it  be  an  Advisory  Committee,  or  by  whatever  name 
called,  who  has  participated  in  such  usurpation  ; who 
has  joined  in  a common  purpose  of  resistance  to  the  law 
and  the  denial  of  the  rights  of  other  citizens,  has  com- 
mitted treason  against  the  State. 

While  the  gravamen  of  this  offense  is  the  design  of 
overturning  the  government  of  the  State,  such  intention 
need  not  extend  to  every  portion  of  its  territory.  It  is 
sufficient  if  it  be  to  overturn  it  in  a particular  locality. 
And  such  intent  may  be  inferred  from  the  acts  com- 
mitted. 

If  they  be  such  that  the  authority  of  the  State  is 
overturned  in  a particular  locality,  and  an  usurped 
authority  substituted  in  its  place,  the  parties  doing  so 
must  be  presumed  to  have  intended  to  do  what  they 
have  actually  done. 


123 


It  is  a maxim  of  the  criminal  law  that  a man  must  be 
presumed  to  have  intended  that  which  is  the  natural 
and  probable  consequences  of  his  act.  Thus,  if  a man 
assaults  another  with  a deadly  weapon,  and  aims  a 
blow  at  a vital  part,  the  law  presumes  he  intended  to 
take  life. 

Aliens  domiciled  within  the  State  and  who  enjoy  its 
protection,  owe  temporary  allegiance  to  it,  and  are 
amenable  for  treason. 

There  are  no  accessories  in  treason,  all  are  prin- 
cipals. 

It  will  be  your  duty  to  examine  all  the  witnesses 
whose  names  appear  on  the  back  of  the  bills  of  indict- 
ment, or  who  shall  be  sent  before  you  by  the  district 
attorney.  It  is  not  your  business  to  try  the  accused 
parties  ; all  you  have  to  do  is  to  ascertain  from  the  evi- 
dence whether  a prima  facie  case  has  been  made  out 
sufficient  to  send  the  defendants  to  a trial  before  a petit 
jury. 

If  you  find  from  the  evidence  that  the  defendants 
have,  or  any  of  them  has,  committed,  participated  or 
aided  in  any  of  the  acts  which  I have  defined  to  you  as 
constituting  the  offense  of  treason,  it  will  be  your  sworn 
duty  to  find  a true  bill  against  the  party  or  parties  so 
offending. 

We  have  reached  a point  in  the  history  of  the  State 
where  there  are  but  two  roads  left  to  us  to  pursue. 
The  one  leads  to  order  and  good  government,  the  other 
leads  to  anarchy. 

The  one  great  question  which  now  confronts  the 
people  of  this  country  is  the  enforcement  of  the  law  and 
the  preservation  of  order.” 


